Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38490303›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD2024

Assay Validation of Cell-Free DNA Shallow Whole-Genome Sequencing to Determine Tumor Fraction in Advanced Cancers.

Micah Rickles-Young, Gabriel Tinoco, Junko Tsuji, Sam Pollock, Marcy Haynam, Heather Lefebvre, Kristyn Glover, Dwight H Owen, Katharine A Collier, Gavin Ha and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Genomic and Epigenomic Analysis of Plasma Cell-Free DNA Identifies Stemness Features Associated with Worse Survival in Lethal Prostate Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2025
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Micah Rickles-YoungGenomics Platform, Broad Institute of Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Gabriel TinocoDivision of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio; Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Junko TsujiGenomics Platform, Broad Institute of Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Sam PollockGenomics Platform, Broad Institute of Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Marcy HaynamOhio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio; Stefanie Spielman Comprehensive Breast Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Heather LefebvreOhio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio; Stefanie Spielman Comprehensive Breast Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Kristyn GloverOhio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio; Stefanie Spielman Comprehensive Breast Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Dwight H OwenDivision of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio; Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Katharine A CollierDivision of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio; Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio.
Gavin HaPublic Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.
Viktor A AdalsteinssonGenomics Platform, Broad Institute of Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Carrie CibulskisGenomics Platform, Broad Institute of Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Niall J LennonGenomics Platform, Broad Institute of Harvard and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Electronic address: nlennon@broadinstitute.org.
Daniel G StoverDivision of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio; Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio; Stefanie Spielman Comprehensive Breast Center, Columbus, Ohio. Electronic address: daniel.stover@osumc.edu.
The Ohio State University · USBroad Institute · USFred Hutch Cancer Center · US

Funding

Assay Validation of Cell-Free DNA Shallow Whole Genome Sequencing To Determine 'Tumor Fraction' in Advanced CancersUH3CA239105 · NCI · BROAD INSTITUTE, INC. · PI ADALSTEINSSON, VIKTOR, LENNON, NIALL JOHN · 2022 to 2024
$762k
Assay Validation of Cell-Free DNA Shallow Whole Genome Sequencing To Determine 'Tumor Fraction' in Advanced CancersUH2CA239105 · NCI · BROAD INSTITUTE, INC. · PI ADALSTEINSSON, VIKTOR, LENNON, NIALL JOHN · 2020 to 2021
$321k
NCI NIH HHS UH2 CA239105NCI NIH HHS UH3 CA239105
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Blood-based liquid biopsy is increasingly used in clinical care of patients with cancer, and fraction of tumor-derived DNA in circulation (tumor fraction; TFx) has demonstrated clinical validity across multiple cancer types. To determine TFx, shallow whole-genome sequencing of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) can be performed from a single blood sample, using an established computational pipeline (ichorCNA), without prior knowledge of tumor mutations, in a highly cost-effective manner. We describe assay validation of this approach to facilitate broad clinical application, including evaluation of assay sensitivity, precision, repeatability, reproducibility, pre-analytic factors, and DNA quality/quantity. Sensitivity to detect TFx of 3% (lower limit of detection) was 97.2% to 100% at 1× and 0.1× mean sequencing depth, respectively. Precision was demonstrated on distinct sequencing instruments (HiSeqX and NovaSeq) with no observable differences. The assay achieved prespecified 95% agreement of TFx across replicates of the same specimen (repeatability) and duplicate samples in different batches (reproducibility). Comparison of samples collected in EDTA and Streck tubes from single venipuncture in 23 patients demonstrated that EDTA or Streck tubes were comparable if processed within 8 hours. On the basis of a range of DNA inputs (1 to 50 ng), 20 ng cfDNA is the preferred input, with 5 ng minimum acceptable. Overall, this shallow whole-genome sequencing of cfDNA and ichorCNA approach offers sensitive, precise, and reproducible quantitation of TFx, facilitating assay application in clinical cancer care.

Indexed as

Cell-Free Nucleic AcidsNeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorDNAEdetic AcidHumansReproducibility of ResultsBiomarkers, TumorCell-Free Nucleic AcidsDNAEdetic Acid

Identifiers

PMID38490303
PMCPMC11090203
OpenAlexW4392739992

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.