4.8 Article

Genomic Profiling of Isolated Circulating Tumor Cells from Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients

Journal

CANCER RESEARCH
Volume 73, Issue 1, Pages 30-40

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-3017

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Veridex
  2. BD Biosciences
  3. National Cancer Institute [NCI] [CA31946, U54 CA90788]
  4. NCI Early Detection Research Network (EDRN) [U01 CA111234]
  5. Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Molecular characterization of circulating tumor cells (CTC) from blood is technically challenging because cells are rare and difficult to isolate. We developed a novel approach to isolate CTCs from blood via immunomagnetic enrichment followed by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (IE-FACS). Isolated CTCs were subjected to genomewide copy number analysis via array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH). In clinical studies, CTCs were isolated from 181 patients with metastatic breast cancer, 102 of which were successfully profiled, including matched archival primary tumor from five patients. CTCs revealed a wide range of copy number alterations including those previously reported in breast cancer. Comparison with two published aCGH datasets of primary breast tumors revealed similar frequencies of recurrent genomic copy number aberrations. In addition, serial testing of CTCs confirmed reproducibility and indicated genomic change over time. Comparison of CTCs with matched archival primary tumors confirmed shared lineage as well as some divergence. We showed that it is feasible to isolate CTCs away from hematopoietic cells with high purity through IE-FACS and profile them via aCGH analysis. Our approach may be used to explore genomic events involved in cancer progression and to monitor therapeutic efficacy of targeted therapies in clinical trials in a relatively noninvasive manner. Cancer Res; 73(1); 30-40. (C) 2012 AACR.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available