Back

Detection of rare mutations, copy number variation, and DNA methylation in the same template DNA molecules

Wang, Y.; Douville, C.; Cohen, J. D.; Mattox, A.; Curtis, S.; Silliman, N.; Popoli, M.; Ptak, J.; Dobbyn, L.; Nehme, N.; Dudley, J. D.; Summers, M.; Zhang, M.; Bettegowda, C.; Papadopoulos, N.; Kinzler, K. W.; Vogelsten, B.

2022-12-07 oncology
10.1101/2022.12.06.22283116 medRxiv
Show abstract

The analysis of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) from plasma offers great promise for the earlier detection of cancer. At present, changes in DNA sequence, methylation, or copy number are the most sensitive ways to detect the presence of cancer. To further increase the sensitivity of such assays with limited amounts of sample, it would be useful to be able to evaluate the same template molecules for all these changes. Here we report an approach, called MethylSaferSeqS, that achieves this goal, and can be applied to any standard library preparation method suitable for massively parallel sequencing. The innovative step was to copy both strands of each DNA-barcoded molecule with a primer that allows the subsequent separation of the original strands (retaining their 5-methylcytosine residues) from the copied strands (in which the 5-methylcytosine residues are replaced with unmodified cytosine residues). The epigenetic and genetic alterations present in the DNA molecules can then be obtained from the original and copied strands, respectively. We applied this approach to plasma from 265 individuals, including 198 with cancers of the pancreas, ovary, lung and colon, and found the expected patterns of mutations, copy number alterations, and methylation. Furthermore, we could determine which original template DNA molecules were methylated and/or mutated. MethylSaferSeqS should be useful for addressing a variety of questions relating genetics and epigenetics in the future.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.