4.7 Review

Circulating Tumor DNA as a Liquid Biopsy for Cancer

Journal

CLINICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 61, Issue 1, Pages 112-123

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1373/clinchem.2014.222679

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: Targeted therapies have markedly changed the treatment of cancer over the past 10 years. However, almost all tumors acquire resistance to systemic treatment as a result of tumor heterogeneity, clonal evolution, and selection. Although genotyping is the most currently used method for categorizing tumors for clinical decisions, tumor tissues provide only a snapshot, or are often difficult to obtain. To overcome these issues, methods are needed for a rapid, cost-effective, and noninvasive identification of biomarkers at various time points during the course of disease. Because cell-free circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a potential surrogate for the entire tumor genome, the use of ctDNA as a liquid biopsy may help to obtain the genetic follow-up data that are urgently needed. CONTENT: This review includes recent studies exploring the diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive potential of ctDNA as a liquid biopsy in cancer. In addition, it covers biological and technical aspects, including recent advances in the analytical sensitivity and accuracy of DNA analysis as well as hurdles that have to be overcome before implementation into clinical routine. SUMMARY: Although the analysis of ctDNA is a promising area, and despite all efforts to develop suitable tools for a comprehensive analysis of tumor genomes from plasma DNA, the liquid biopsy is not yet routinely used as a clinical application. Harmonization of preanalytical and analytical procedures is needed to provide clinical standards to validate the liquid biopsy as a clinical biomarker in well-designed and sufficiently powered multicenter studies. (C) 2014 American Association for Clinical Chemistry

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