4.7 Article

Patient monitoring through liquid biopsies using circulating tumor DNA

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 141, Issue 5, Pages 887-896

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.30759

Keywords

circulating tumor DNA; liquid biopsy; tumor monitoring; tumor evolution models; detection limits

Categories

Funding

  1. CANCER-ID [Innovative Medicines Joint Undertaking (IMI JU)] [16917]
  2. CANCER-ID [Servier] [16917]
  3. CANCER-ID [Austrian National Bank (ONB)] [16917]
  4. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P28949-B28]
  5. BioTechMed-Graz (flagship project EPIAge)
  6. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P28949] Funding Source: Austrian Science Fund (FWF)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tumors release components such as circulating tumor cells (CTCs), circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), and tumor-derived extracellular vesicles into the circulation. Multiple studies have demonstrated that molecular information about tumors and metastases can be extracted from these factors, which are therefore frequently referred to as liquid biopsies. Liquid biopsies allow the longitudinal monitoring of tumor genomes non-invasively and may hence ensure that patients receive appropriate treatments that target the molecular features of their disease. Accordingly, the number of studies employing liquid biopsy based assays has been skyrocketing in the last few years. Here, we focus on three important issues, which are of high relevance for monitoring tumor genomes. First, we analyze the relation between the allele frequency of somatic tumor-specific mutations and the tumor fraction within plasma DNA. Second, we ask how well current tumor evolution models correlate with findings in longitudinal liquid biopsy studies. And, finally, as sensitivity is one of the key challenges of mutation detection, we address the challenge of detecting mutations occurring at very low allele frequencies in plasma DNA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available