Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37075072›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2023

Fragmentation landscape of cell-free DNA revealed by deconvolutional analysis of end motifs.

Ze Zhou, Mary-Jane L Ma, Rebecca W Y Chan, W K Jacky Lam, Wenlei Peng, Wanxia Gai, Xi Hu, Spencer C Ding, Lu Ji, Qing Zhou and 15 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed
20.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

68 citing papers in PubMed, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Ze ZhouCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Mary-Jane L MaCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Rebecca W Y ChanCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.
W K Jacky LamCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Wenlei PengCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Wanxia GaiCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Xi HuCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Spencer C DingCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Lu JiCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2910-5706
Qing ZhouCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0001-7737-9643
Peter P H CheungLi Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Stephanie C Y YuCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Jeremy Y C TeohDepartment of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Cheuk-Chun SzetoDepartment of Medicine and Therapeutics, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
John WongDepartment of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0002-8956-8596
Vincent W S WongDepartment of Medicine and Therapeutics, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Grace L H WongMedical Data Analytics Centre, Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Stephen L ChanState Key Laboratory of Translational Oncology, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8998-5480
Edwin P HuiState Key Laboratory of Translational Oncology, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Brigette B Y MaState Key Laboratory of Translational Oncology, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Anthony T C ChanState Key Laboratory of Translational Oncology, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Rossa W K ChiuCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8207-9207
K C Allen ChanCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Y M Dennis LoCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8746-0293
Peiyong JiangCentre for Novostics, Hong Kong Science Park, Pak Shek Kok, Hong Kong SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0003-4523-3476
Chinese University of Hong Kong · HK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) fragmentation is nonrandom, at least partially mediated by various DNA nucleases, forming characteristic cfDNA end motifs. However, there is a paucity of tools for deciphering the relative contributions of cfDNA cleavage patterns related to underlying fragmentation factors. In this study, through non-negative matrix factorization algorithm, we used 256 5' 4-mer end motifs to identify distinct types of cfDNA cleavage patterns, referred to as "founder" end-motif profiles (F-profiles). F-profiles were associated with different DNA nucleases based on whether such patterns were disrupted in nuclease-knockout mouse models. Contributions of individual F-profiles in a cfDNA sample could be determined by deconvolutional analysis. We analyzed 93 murine cfDNA samples of different nuclease-deficient mice and identified six types of F-profiles. F-profiles I, II, and III were linked to deoxyribonuclease 1 like 3 (DNASE1L3), deoxyribonuclease 1 (DNASE1), and DNA fragmentation factor subunit beta (DFFB), respectively. We revealed that 42.9% of plasma cfDNA molecules were attributed to DNASE1L3-mediated fragmentation, whereas 43.4% of urinary cfDNA molecules involved DNASE1-mediated fragmentation. We further demonstrated that the relative contributions of F-profiles were useful to inform pathological states, such as autoimmune disorders and cancer. Among the six F-profiles, the use of F-profile I could inform the human patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. F-profile VI could be used to detect individuals with hepatocellular carcinoma, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.97. F-profile VI was more prominent in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma undergoing chemoradiotherapy. We proposed that this profile might be related to oxidative stress.

Indexed as

Cell-Free Nucleic AcidsAnimalsDeoxyribonucleasesDNA FragmentationEndodeoxyribonucleasesEndonucleasesHumansMiceMice, KnockoutCell-Free Nucleic AcidsDeoxyribonucleasesDnase1l3 protein, mouseEndodeoxyribonucleasesEndonucleasescancer detectionfragmentomicsliquid biopsynon-negative matrix factorizationoxidative stress

Identifiers

PMID37075072
PMCPMC10151549
OpenAlexW4366351594

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.