Cargando…

Prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in the circulating tumor DNA testing

BACKGROUND: Somatic and germline variants are not distinguishable by circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing without analyzing non-tumor samples. Although confirmatory germline testing is clinically relevant, the criteria for selecting presumed germline variants have not been established in ctDNA test...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yamamoto, Yoshihiro, Fukuyama, Keita, Kanai, Masashi, Kondo, Tomohiro, Yoshioka, Masahiro, Kou, Tadayuki, Quy, Pham Nguyen, Kimura-Tsuchiya, Reiko, Yamada, Takahiro, Matsumoto, Shigemi, Kosugi, Shinji, Muto, Manabu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Nature Singapore 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9510107/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35870019
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-022-02220-x
_version_ 1784797380115169280
author Yamamoto, Yoshihiro
Fukuyama, Keita
Kanai, Masashi
Kondo, Tomohiro
Yoshioka, Masahiro
Kou, Tadayuki
Quy, Pham Nguyen
Kimura-Tsuchiya, Reiko
Yamada, Takahiro
Matsumoto, Shigemi
Kosugi, Shinji
Muto, Manabu
author_facet Yamamoto, Yoshihiro
Fukuyama, Keita
Kanai, Masashi
Kondo, Tomohiro
Yoshioka, Masahiro
Kou, Tadayuki
Quy, Pham Nguyen
Kimura-Tsuchiya, Reiko
Yamada, Takahiro
Matsumoto, Shigemi
Kosugi, Shinji
Muto, Manabu
author_sort Yamamoto, Yoshihiro
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Somatic and germline variants are not distinguishable by circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing without analyzing non-tumor samples. Although confirmatory germline testing is clinically relevant, the criteria for selecting presumed germline variants have not been established in ctDNA testing. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in clinical ctDNA testing through their variant allele fractions (VAFs). METHODS: A total of consecutive 106 patients with advanced solid tumors who underwent ctDNA testing (Guardant360(®)) between January 2018 and March 2020 were eligible for this study. To verify the origin of pathogenic variants reported in ctDNA testing, germline sequencing was performed using peripheral blood DNA samples archived in the Clinical Bioresource Center in Kyoto University Hospital (Kyoto, Japan) under clinical research settings. RESULTS: Among 223 pathogenic variants reported in ctDNA testing, the median VAF was 0.9% (0.02–81.8%), and 88 variants with ≥ 1% VAFs were analyzed in germline sequencing. Among 25 variants with ≥ 30% VAFs, seven were found in peripheral blood DNA (BRCA2: n = 6, JAK2: n = 1). In contrast, among the 63 variants with VAFs ranging from 1 to < 30%, only one variant was found in peripheral blood DNA (TP53: n = 1). Eventually, this variant with 15.6% VAF was defined to be an acquired variant, because its allelic distribution did not completely link to those of neighboring germline polymorphisms. CONCLUSION: Our current study demonstrated that VAFs values are helpful for selecting presumed germline variants in clinical ctDNA testing. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10147-022-02220-x.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9510107
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Nature Singapore
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95101072022-09-27 Prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in the circulating tumor DNA testing Yamamoto, Yoshihiro Fukuyama, Keita Kanai, Masashi Kondo, Tomohiro Yoshioka, Masahiro Kou, Tadayuki Quy, Pham Nguyen Kimura-Tsuchiya, Reiko Yamada, Takahiro Matsumoto, Shigemi Kosugi, Shinji Muto, Manabu Int J Clin Oncol Original Article BACKGROUND: Somatic and germline variants are not distinguishable by circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing without analyzing non-tumor samples. Although confirmatory germline testing is clinically relevant, the criteria for selecting presumed germline variants have not been established in ctDNA testing. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in clinical ctDNA testing through their variant allele fractions (VAFs). METHODS: A total of consecutive 106 patients with advanced solid tumors who underwent ctDNA testing (Guardant360(®)) between January 2018 and March 2020 were eligible for this study. To verify the origin of pathogenic variants reported in ctDNA testing, germline sequencing was performed using peripheral blood DNA samples archived in the Clinical Bioresource Center in Kyoto University Hospital (Kyoto, Japan) under clinical research settings. RESULTS: Among 223 pathogenic variants reported in ctDNA testing, the median VAF was 0.9% (0.02–81.8%), and 88 variants with ≥ 1% VAFs were analyzed in germline sequencing. Among 25 variants with ≥ 30% VAFs, seven were found in peripheral blood DNA (BRCA2: n = 6, JAK2: n = 1). In contrast, among the 63 variants with VAFs ranging from 1 to < 30%, only one variant was found in peripheral blood DNA (TP53: n = 1). Eventually, this variant with 15.6% VAF was defined to be an acquired variant, because its allelic distribution did not completely link to those of neighboring germline polymorphisms. CONCLUSION: Our current study demonstrated that VAFs values are helpful for selecting presumed germline variants in clinical ctDNA testing. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10147-022-02220-x. Springer Nature Singapore 2022-07-23 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9510107/ /pubmed/35870019 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-022-02220-x Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Yamamoto, Yoshihiro
Fukuyama, Keita
Kanai, Masashi
Kondo, Tomohiro
Yoshioka, Masahiro
Kou, Tadayuki
Quy, Pham Nguyen
Kimura-Tsuchiya, Reiko
Yamada, Takahiro
Matsumoto, Shigemi
Kosugi, Shinji
Muto, Manabu
Prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in the circulating tumor DNA testing
title Prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in the circulating tumor DNA testing
title_full Prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in the circulating tumor DNA testing
title_fullStr Prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in the circulating tumor DNA testing
title_full_unstemmed Prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in the circulating tumor DNA testing
title_short Prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in the circulating tumor DNA testing
title_sort prevalence of pathogenic germline variants in the circulating tumor dna testing
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9510107/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35870019
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10147-022-02220-x
work_keys_str_mv AT yamamotoyoshihiro prevalenceofpathogenicgermlinevariantsinthecirculatingtumordnatesting
AT fukuyamakeita prevalenceofpathogenicgermlinevariantsinthecirculatingtumordnatesting
AT kanaimasashi prevalenceofpathogenicgermlinevariantsinthecirculatingtumordnatesting
AT kondotomohiro prevalenceofpathogenicgermlinevariantsinthecirculatingtumordnatesting
AT yoshiokamasahiro prevalenceofpathogenicgermlinevariantsinthecirculatingtumordnatesting
AT koutadayuki prevalenceofpathogenicgermlinevariantsinthecirculatingtumordnatesting
AT quyphamnguyen prevalenceofpathogenicgermlinevariantsinthecirculatingtumordnatesting
AT kimuratsuchiyareiko prevalenceofpathogenicgermlinevariantsinthecirculatingtumordnatesting
AT yamadatakahiro prevalenceofpathogenicgermlinevariantsinthecirculatingtumordnatesting
AT matsumotoshigemi prevalenceofpathogenicgermlinevariantsinthecirculatingtumordnatesting
AT kosugishinji prevalenceofpathogenicgermlinevariantsinthecirculatingtumordnatesting
AT mutomanabu prevalenceofpathogenicgermlinevariantsinthecirculatingtumordnatesting