DNA methylation biomarkers have emerged as promising tools for cancer detection. Common methylation patterns across tumor types allow multi-cancer detection. Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) has gained considerable attention for methylation detection. However, multi-cancer detection using multiple targets in ddPCR has never been performed before. Therefore, we developed a multiplex ddPCR assay for multi-cancer detection. Based on previous data analyses using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), we selected differentially methylated targets for eight frequent tumor types (lung, breast, colorectal, prostate, pancreatic, head and neck, liver, and esophageal cancer). Three targets were validated using ddPCR in 103 tumor and 109 normal adjacent fresh frozen samples. Two distinct ddPCR assays were successfully developed. Output data from both assays is combined to obtain a read-out from the three targets together. Our overall ddPCR assay has a cross-validated area under the curve (cvAUC) of 0.948. Performance between distinct cancer types varies, with sensitivities ranging from 53.8% to 100% and specificities ranging from 80% to 100%. Compared to previously published single-target parameters, we show that combining targets can drastically increase sensitivity and specificity, while lowering DNA input. In conclusion, we are the first to report a multi-cancer methylation ddPCR assay, which allows for highly accurate tumor predictions.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11705734PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.13708DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

multi-cancer detection
12
ddpcr assay
12
cancer types
8
droplet digital
8
digital pcr
8
tumor types
8
targets ddpcr
8
three targets
8
ddpcr
7
cancer
5

Similar Publications

Early cancer detection substantially improves the rate of patient survival; however, conventional screening methods are directed at single anatomical sites and focus primarily on a limited number of cancers, such as gastric, colorectal, lung, breast, and cervical cancer. Additionally, several cancers are inadequately screened, hindering early detection of 45.5% cases.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

The analysis of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) through minimally invasive liquid biopsies is promising for early multi-cancer detection and monitoring minimal residual disease. Most existing methods focus on targeted deep sequencing, but few integrate multiple data modalities. Here, we develop a methodology for ctDNA detection using deep (80x) whole-genome TET-Assisted Pyridine Borane Sequencing (TAPS), a less destructive approach than bisulphite sequencing, which permits the simultaneous analysis of genomic and methylomic data.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

This essay focuses on the ethical considerations and implications of providing a universal multi-cancer screening test as the best approach to reduce societal cancer burden in a society with limited funds, resources, and infrastructure. With 1.9 million cancer diagnoses each year in the United States, with 86% of all cancers diagnosed in individuals over the age of 50, and with screening tools approved for only four cancer types (breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer), it seems that a multi-cancer screening test to detect most cancer early that is easy to administer, and is accurate and cost-effective, would be worth considering.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) through a single blood test significantly advances cancer diagnosis. However, most MCED tests rely on a single type of biomarkers, leading to limited sensitivity, particularly for early-stage cancers. We previously developed SPOT-MAS, a multimodal ctDNA-based assay analyzing methylation and fragmentomic profiles to detect five common cancers.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF
Article Synopsis
  • The two-step cancer screening method uses OncoSeek and SeekInCare to effectively reduce false positives while identifying cancer cases.
  • The first test, OncoSeek, leads to a significantly high number of false positives at 441,450, but when combined with SeekInCare, this drops to just 34,335.
  • Compared to other tests, the two-step approach is much more cost-effective, costing only $713.6 million versus $3,750 million for SeekInCare and $4,745 million for Galleri.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!