| Literature DB >> 33968675 |
Yujiro Hayashi1, Kazutoshi Fujita2.
Abstract
Liquid biopsy technique targeting urinary cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is getting a lot of attention to overcome limitations of the present treatment strategy for urothelial carcinoma, including urothelial bladder carcinoma (UBC) and upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). Analysis of tumor-derived DNA in urine focusing either on genomic or epigenomic alterations, holds great potential as a noninvasive method for the detection of urothelial carcinoma with high accuracy. It is also predictive of prognosis and response to drugs, and reveals the underlying characteristics of different stages of urothelial carcinoma. Although cfDNA methylation analyses based on a combination of several methylation profiles have demonstrated high sensitivity for UBC diagnosis, there have been few reports involving epigenomic studies of urinary cfDNA. In mutational analyses, frequent gene mutations (TERT promoter, TP53, FGFR3, PIK3CA, RAS, etc.) have been detected in urine supernatant by using remarkable technological innovations such as next-generation sequencing and droplet digital PCR. These methods allow highly sensitive detection of rare mutation alleles while minimizing artifacts. In this review, we summarize the current insights into the clinical applications of urinary cfDNA from patients with urothelial carcinoma. Although it is necessary to conduct prospective multi-institutional clinical trials, noninvasive urine biopsy is expected to play an important role in the realization of precision medicine in patients with urothelial carcinoma in the near future. 2021 Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved.Entities:
Keywords: Cell-free DNA (cfDNA); FGFR3; TERT promoter; TP53; liquid biopsy; methylation; urine; urothelial carcinoma
Year: 2021 PMID: 33968675 PMCID: PMC8100839 DOI: 10.21037/tau-20-1259
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Androl Urol ISSN: 2223-4683
Figure 1Applications of urinary cfDNA analysis during UC management.
Urinary cfDNA methylation panels and clinical utilities for urothelial carcinoma
| Cancer type | Cohort | Sample | Method | Target | Sensitivity | Specificity | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UBC | 46 UBC, 39 hematuria | Urinary cfDNA | GWBS | GWBS | 93.5% | 95.8% | ( |
| UBC | 263 urine samples | Urinary cfDNA | PCR, MSP | – | – | ( | |
| UBC | 14 UBC, 12 hematuria | Urine pellet, urinary cfDNA | MSP | GHSR/MAL | AUC: 0.83 | – | ( |
GWBS, genome wide bisulfite sequence.
Figure 2Reported sensitivities of methylation analysis of urine DNA.
Urinary cfDNA mutational panels and clinical utilities for urothelial carcinoma
| Cancer type | Cohort | Sample | Method | Sensitivity | Specificity | Reference | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIBC | 17 | p, ucf | WGS | – | – | 108 | – |
| Mostly NMIBC | 143 UC, 144 control | p, up, ucf | Targeted sequence ( | 81.8% | 97.7% | 107 | ** |
| NMIBC | 25 | p, ucf | Targeted sequence (71 genes) | – | – | 109 | – |
| NMIBC (cystectomy) | 363 NMIBC, 468 cystectomies | p, ucf | Personalized ddPCR | NA | NA | 106 | – |
| UBC | 23 | up, ucf | Oncoscan | 90% | – | 64 | *** |
| UBC | 150 UBC, 52 hematuria | ucf | ddPCR ( | 85.9%* | 100% | 105 | – |
| UBC | 6 progress, 6 recurrence | p, ucf | Personalized ddPCR | NA | NA | 110 | – |
| UBC | 9 cystectomies | ucf | Targeted sequence (9 genes) | – | – | 111 | – |
| UBC | 104 | ucf | ddPCR ( | 68.3% | – | 112 | – |
| UBC | 53 UBC, 36 control | up, ucf | Targeted sequence ( | 63% | – | 115 | **** |
| UBC | 118 UBC, 67 control | ucf | Targeted sequence (460 genes) | 93% | 96% | 77 | – |
| UBC | 92 BT, 33 control | up, ucf | Targeted sequence (5 genes) | – | – | 116 | – |
| UC | 65 UC, 198 control | up, ucf | WGS | 86.5% | 94.7% | 65 | – |
| UTUC | 56 UTUC, 50 hematuria, | ucf | ddPCR ( | 78.6%* | 96% | 113 | – |
| UTUC | 26 | ucf | WGS | – | – | 114 | – |
*, combined with urine cytology; **, the sensitivity was 66–83.5% in urine pellet, and 7.1% in p.; the specificity was 94.6–100% in urine pellet, and 98.7% in p.; ***, the sensitivity was 61% in urine pellet; ****, the sensitivity was 77% in urine pellet. p, plasma; up, urine pellet DNA; ucf, urinary cfDNA; WGS, whole genome sequence.
Figure 3Reported sensitivities of mutational analysis of urinary cfDNA.