4.6 Review

Clonal Hematopoiesis in Liquid Biopsy: From Biological Noise to Valuable Clinical Implications

期刊

CANCERS
卷 12, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cancers12082277

关键词

liquid biopsy; circulating tumor DNA; clonal hematopoiesis; next-generation sequencing

类别

资金

  1. Council for Science, Technology and Innovation (CSTI)
  2. cross-ministerial Strategic Innovation Promotion Program (SIP)
  3. Innovative AI Hospital System (Funding Agency: National Institute of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition (NIBIOHN))

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of blood liquid biopsy is being gradually incorporated into the clinical setting of cancer management. The minimally invasive nature of the usage of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and its ability to capture the molecular alterations of tumors are great advantages for their clinical applications. However, somatic mosaicism in plasma remains an immense challenge for accurate interpretation of liquid biopsy results. Clonal hematopoiesis (CH) is part of the normal process of aging with the accumulation of somatic mutations and clonal expansion of hematopoietic stem cells. The detection of these non-tumor derived CH-mutations has been repeatedly reported as a source of biological background noise of blood liquid biopsy. Incorrect classification of CH mutations as tumor-derived mutations could lead to inappropriate therapeutic management. CH has also been associated with an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease and hematological malignancies. Cancer patients, who are CH carriers, are more prone to develop therapy-related myeloid neoplasms after chemotherapy than non-carriers. The detection of CH mutations from plasma cfDNA analysis should be cautiously evaluated for their potential pathological relevance. Although CH mutations are currently considered as false-positives in cfDNA analysis, future studies should evaluate their clinical significance in healthy individuals and cancer patients.

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

4.6
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