Search

Abstract Background CT scans are used in routine clinical practice for the diagnosis and treatment surveillance of non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, more sensitive methods are desirable. Liquid biopsy analyses of RNA and DNA can offer more sensitive diagnostic approaches. Cell‐free RNA (cfRNA) has been described in several malignancies, but its clinical utility has not previously been explored. Methods We evaluated the clinical utility of cfRNA for early detection and surveillance of tumor disease in a proof‐of‐concept study. Using real‐time‐droplet digital polymerase chain reaction we characterized a candidate transcript (MORF4L2) in plasma samples from 41 advanced stage, 38 early stage NSCLC and 39 healthy samples. We compared its diagnostic performance with tumor markers and evaluated its utility for disease monitoring. Results MORF4L2 cfRNA was more abundant in patients than in healthy donors (p

Background: Radiology is the current standard for monitoring treatment responses in lung cancer. Limited sensitivity, exposure to ionizing radiations and related sequelae constitute some of its major limitation. Non-invasive and highly sensitive methods for early detection of treatment failures and resistance-associated disease progression would have additional clinical utility. Methods: We analyzed serially collected plasma and paired tumor samples from lung cancer patients (61 with stage IV, 48 with stages I-III disease) and 61 healthy samples by means of next-generation sequencing, radiological imaging and droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) mutation and methylation assays. Results: A 62% variant concordance between tumor-reported and circulating-free DNA (cfDNA) sequencing was observed between baseline liquid and tissue biopsies in stage IV patients. Interestingly, ctDNA sequencing allowed for the identification of resistance-mediating p.T790M mutations in baseline plasma samples for which no such mutation was observed in the corresponding tissue. Serial circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) mutation analysis by means of ddPCR revealed a general decrease in ctDNA loads between baseline and first reassessment. Additionally, serial ctDNA analyses only recapitulated computed tomography (CT) -monitored tumor dynamics of some, but not all lesions within the same patient. To complement ctDNA variant analysis we devised a ctDNA methylation assay (methcfDNA) based on methylation-sensitive restriction enzymes. cfDNA methylation showed and area under the curve (AUC) of > 0.90 in early and late stage cases. A decrease in methcfDNA between baseline and first reassessment was reflected by a decrease in CT-derive tumor surface area, irrespective of tumor mutational status. Conclusion: Taken together, our data support the use of cfDNA sequencing for unbiased characterization of the molecular tumor architecture, highlights the impact of tumor architectural heterogeneity on ctDNA-based tumor surveillance and the added value of complementary approaches such as cfDNA methylation for early detection and monitoring