4.5 Article

Characterization of the cell-free DNA released by cultured cancer cells

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbamcr.2015.10.022

关键词

Cell-free DNA (cfDNA); Apoptosis; Necrosis; Osteosarcoma; Flow cytometry

资金

  1. National Research Foundation (NRF), South Africa [SFH13092447078, SFH14061869958]
  2. NRF

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The most prominent factor that delays the translation of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analyses to clinical practice is the lack of knowledge regarding its origin and composition. The elucidation of the former is complicated by the seemingly random fluctuation of quantitative and qualitative characteristics of cfDNA in the blood of healthy and diseased individuals. Besides methodological discrepancies, this could be ascribed to a web of cellular responses to various environmental cues and stressors. Since all cells release cfDNA, it follows that the cfDNA in the blood of cancer patients is not only representative of tumor derived DNA, but also of DNA released by healthy cells under different conditions. Additionally, cfDNA released by malignant cells is not necessarily just aberrant, but likely includes non-mutated chromosomal DNA fragments. This may cause false positive/negative results. Although many have acknowledged that this is a major problem, few have addressed it. We propose that many of the current stumbling blocks encountered in in vivo cfDNA studies can be partially circumvented by in vitro models. Accordingly, the purpose of this work was to evaluate the release of cfDNA from cultured cells and to gauge its potential use for elucidating the nature of cfDNA. Results suggest that the occurrence of cfDNA is not a consequence of apoptosis or necrosis, but primarily a result of actively secreted DNA, perhaps in association with a protein complex. This study demonstrates the potential of in vitro cell culture models to obtain useful information about the phenomenon of cfDNA. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据