Back

Feasibility and promise of circulating tumor DNA analysis in dogs with naturally-occurring sarcoma.

Favaro, P. F.; Stewart, S. D.; McDonald, B. R.; Cawley, J.; Contente-Cuomo, T.; Wong, S.; Hendricks, W. P.; Trent, J. M.; Khanna, C.; Murtaza, M.

2020-08-21 genomics
10.1101/2020.08.20.260349 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Comparative studies of naturally-occurring canine cancers have provided new insight into many areas of cancer research. The inclusion of pet dogs in the development and validation of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) diagnostics may be uniquely informative for human translation for many reasons, including: high incidence of certain spontaneous cancers, repeated access to blood and tumor from the same individuals during the course of disease progression, and molecular heterogeneity of naturally-occurring cancers in dogs. Here, we present a feasibility study of ctDNA analysis performed in 9 healthy dogs and 39 dogs with either benign or malignant splenic tumors (hemangiosarcoma) using shallow whole genome sequencing (sWGS) of cell-free DNA. To enable detection and quantification of ctDNA using sWGS, we adapted two informatic approaches and compared their performance for the canine genome. At presentation, mean ctDNA tumor fraction in dogs with malignant splenic tumors was 11.2%, significantly higher than dogs with benign lesions (3.2%; p 0.001), achieving an AUC of 0.84. ctDNA tumor fraction was 14.3% and 9.0% in dogs with metastatic and localized disease, respectively although this difference was not statistically significant (p 0.227). In paired analysis, ctDNA fraction decreased from 11.0% to 7.9% after resection of malignant tumors (p 0.047). Our results demonstrate that ctDNA analysis is feasible in dogs with hemangiosarcoma using a cost-effective approach such as sWGS. Future studies are underway to validate these findings, and further evaluate the role of ctDNA to assess burden of disease and treatment response during drug development.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Frontiers in Veterinary Science
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.3%
2
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 15%
12.7%
3
BMC Genomics
406 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
10.3%
4
Frontiers in Genetics
230 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.6%
50% of probability mass above
5
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 22%
4.6%
6
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
98 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.3%
7
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.3%
8
Genes
144 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.6%
9
Frontiers in Immunology
638 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.5%
10
Poultry Science
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
11
PLOS Genetics
862 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.1%
12
Disease Models & Mechanisms
119 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
13
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.9%
14
Ecology and Evolution
267 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
15
Genome Medicine
183 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
16
Emerging Infectious Diseases
105 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
17
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
351 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
18
Biology
45 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
19
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
252 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
20
Cancers
213 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
21
The Journal of Pathology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%
22
JCO Precision Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%
23
The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics
39 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%
24
Blood Advances
62 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
25
Journal of Heredity
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
26
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 42%
0.5%
27
Evolution Letters
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
28
Biology Open
156 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.5%
29
Gigabyte
62 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
30
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 38%
0.5%