| Literature DB >> 35600407 |
Ningjia Shen1, Bin Zhu1, Wei Zhang2, Baoning Nian2, Xiaoya Xu2, Lianghe Yu1, Xiang Ruan1, Sheng Chen2, Yang Liu1, Xinkai Cao2, Xintong Shi1, Zhikuan Li2, Xingfeng Huang1, Xiang Wang1, Caifu Chen2, Lei Xiong2, Dadong Zhang2, Xiaohui Fu1, Yongjie Zhang1.
Abstract
Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) exists in various types of bodily fluids, including plasma, urine, bile, and others. Bile cfDNA could serve as a promising liquid biopsy for biliary tract cancer (BTC) patients, as bile directly contacts tumors in the biliary tract system. However, there is no commercial kit or widely acknowledged method for bile cfDNA extraction. In this study, we established a silica-membrane-based method, namely 3D-BCF, for bile cfDNA isolation, exhibiting effective recovery of DNA fragments in the spike-in assay. We then compared the 3D-BCF method with four other commercial kits: the BIOG cfDNA Easy Kit (BIOG), QIAamp DNA Mini Kit (Qiagen), MagMAXTM Cell-Free DNA Isolation Kit (Thermo Fisher), and NORGEN Urine Cell-Free Circulating DNA Purification Mini Kit (Norgen Biotek). The proposed 3D-BCF method exhibited the highest cfDNA isolation efficiency (p < 0.0001) from patient bile samples, and bile cfDNA of short, medium or long fragments could all be extracted effectively. To test whether the extracted bile cfDNA from patients carries tumor-related genomic information, we performed next-generation sequencing on the cfDNA and verified the gene-mutation results by polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-Sanger chromatograms and copy-number-variation (CNV) detection by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) of tumor tissues. The 3D-BCF method could efficiently extract cfDNA from bile samples, providing technical support for bile cfDNA as a promising liquid biopsy for BTC patient diagnosis and prognosis.Entities:
Keywords: bile; cell-free DNA; extraction; liquid biopsy; yield
Year: 2022 PMID: 35600407 PMCID: PMC9116272 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.891917
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 5.738
Figure 1Bile cfDNA extraction procedure and cfDNA quality control of 3D-BCF method. (A) Schematic diagram of bile sample collection. (B) Flowchart of bile cfDNA extraction and quality control.
Figure 2Extraction efficiency of the 3D-BCF method confirmed by spike-in assay. (A) Diagram of spike-in assay. Artificial DNA was spiked-in the solvent bile and then extracted by the 3D-BCF method. (B) Ratios of nucleic acids to proteins of DNA fragments extracted by 3D-BCF method. (C) Recovery rates of total spiked DNA fragments using 3D-BCF method. (D) Calculation of recovery rate of each extracted artificial DNA fragment using 3D-BCF method. (E) DNA fragment distribution of artificial DNA extracted by 3D-BCF method. ns, no significance.
Figure 3Comparison of five extraction methods in extracting cfDNA from patients-derived bile samples. (A) Flowchart of study design. Bile samples were derived from patients with malignant biliary tract tumors, and bile cfDNA was extracted using five different methods. (B) Extracted bile cfDNA amount obtained by different methods from three patient bile samples. (C) Percentages of different fragments of patient-derived bile cfDNA. (D) Representative images of fragment distributions of bile cfDNA derived from patients’ bile samples. ****, p < 0.0001.
Comprehensive comparison of different cfDNA extraction kits using bile samples of three patients with malignant tumors.
| Bile cfDNA extraction method | Kit type | Time (min/single sample) | Patient | Avg. yield of total cfDNA ng/300μl bile | Avg. A260/A280 of bile cfDNA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Spin column | 50 | Patient #1 | 412.0 ± 20.4 | 1.77 ± 0.07 |
| Patient #2 | 334.0 ± 30.6 | 2.05 ± 0.04 | |||
| Patient #3 | 3018.0 ± 72.7 | 1.86 ± 0.01 | |||
|
| Spin column | 35 | Patient #1 | 357.0 ± 67.0 | 1.86 ± 0.07 |
| Patient #2 | 254.6 ± 49.6 | 1.52 ± 0.27 | |||
| Patient #3 | 1924.0 ± 76.4 | 1.84 ± 0.01 | |||
|
| Spin column | 85 | Patient #1 | 41.9 ± 1.5 | 1.87 ± 0.10 |
| Patient #2 | 27.9 ± 6.0 | 2.35 ± 0.58 | |||
| Patient #3 | 89.8 ± 20.5 | 2.11 ± 0.24 | |||
|
| Magnetic beads | 70 | Patient #1 | 143.0 ± 11.1 | 1.98 ± 0.09 |
| Patient #2 | 194.8 ± 20.9 | 1.99 ± 0.05 | |||
| Patient #3 | 862.0 ± 71.1 | 1.89 ± 0.03 | |||
|
| Spin column | 40 | Patient #1 | 40.4 ± 2.4 | 1.25 ± 0.02 |
| Patient #2 | 25.8 ± 4.8 | 1.00 ± 0.03 | |||
| Patient #3 | 237.8 ± 24.8 | 1.79 ± 0.01 |
Bile cfDNA extraction experiments of the five different methods were performed on bile samples derived from three different patients with malignant tumors. Each row represented the extraction results of each patient’s bile sample. The experiments were carried out in three replicates of each patient’s bile samples per method.
Figure 4Validation of genomic alterations of extracted bile cfDNA. (A) Flowchart of validation of genomic alterations. (B) Sanger chromatograms of gene mutation sites. (C) Gene CNVs verified by FISH of tumor tissue. Red dots represents target gene probes, and green dots represent the centromeres of the chromosome where the target gene is located. Magnification 1000×.
SNVs of bile cfDNA verified by site-specific PCR and Sanger Sequencing.
| Patient | Gene | Mutation Site | Type | MAF | RefSeq | Region | Consequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| c.1137C>G | Nonsynonymous | 0.20 | NM_014967 | CDS | p.F379L |
|
| c.196G>A | Nonsynonymous | 0.21 | NM_005657 | CDS | p.E66K | |
|
| c.9603_9611dup | Nonframeshift | 0.19 | NM_006885 | CDS | p.Q3202_Q3204dup | |
|
| c.1505G>A | Nonsynonymous | 0.18 | NM_006164 | CDS | p.R502H | |
|
| c.38G>A | Nonsynonymous | 0.02 | NM_004985 | CDS | p.G13D | |
|
|
| c.221G>A | Nonsynonymous | 0.43 | NM_003589 | CDS | p.G74E |
|
| c.906_917del | Nonframeshift | 0.27 | NM_174907 | CDS | p.D304_E307del | |
|
|
| c.2040del | Frameshift | 0.18 | NM_022552 | CDS | p.I681Sfs*24 |
|
| c.977C>G | Nonsynonymous | 0.44 | NM_002944 | CDS | p.T326R | |
|
| c.39_47dup | Nonframeshift | 0.29 | NM_004557 | CDS | p.L14_L16dup |
Primers and PCR conditions for validation of mutation sites.
| Patient | Target gene | Primer sequence | PCR condition | Amplicon size (bp) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| F: AAGCGTCGATGGAGGAGTTT | 95°C 10 min, (95°C 20 s, 56°C 20 s, 72°C 40 s) × 35 cycles, 72°C 5 min | 545 |
| R:TGGACCCTGACATACTCCCAA | ||||
|
| F: GAAAGCCAAAAGGCTACCCG | 95°C 10 min, (95°C 20 s, 56°C 20 s, 72°C 40 s) × 35 cycles, 72°C 5 min | 656 | |
| R: CCCATGAACACTCCCACAGG | ||||
|
| F: CCATTCCAGGGGAGCAGATG | 95°C 10 min, (95°C 20 s, 56°C 20 s, 72°C 40 s) × 35 cycles, 72°C 5 min | 600 | |
| R: ACGCAGATACCACAGTAGGC | ||||
|
| F: AGCCGAACTTGATGGGTCTG | 95°C 10 min, (95°C 20 s, 56°C 20 s, 72°C 40 s)× 35 cycles, 72°C 5 min | 415 | |
| R: GCAGGGTCTACCGCATACTC | ||||
|
| F: CCTTGTCACCATCTCAGGGG | 95°C 10 min, (95°C 20 s, 56°C 20 s, 72°C 40 s)× 35 cycles, 72°C 5 min | 553 | |
| R: TTGCCATCTCTTGTTTGCTGC | ||||
|
|
| F: ATACAAGGCGCGCTAGACTG | 95°C 10 min, (95°C 20 s, 56°C 20 s, 72°C 40 s)× 35 cycles, 72°C 5 min | 639 |
| R: AGCGTGTCATCTGGCTTTGT | ||||
|
| F: CGTATGGAAGACTTGCGGGT | 95°C 10 min, (95°C 20 s, 56°C 20 s, 72°C 40 s)× 35 cycles, 72°C 5 min | 1393 | |
| R: ACCACTGATTTGCCCAGACC | ||||
|
|
| F: AACGAGGCATGAGACAGAGC | 95°C 10 min, (95°C 20 s, 56°C 20 s, 72°C 40 s)× 35 cycles, 72°C 5 min | 693 |
| R: AACTGTCCAGAAACCAGCCC | ||||
|
| F: CATAACCCACTCTGGCCTGG | 95°C 10 min, (95°C 20 s, 56°C 20 s, 72°C 40 s)× 35 cycles, 72°C 5 min | 843 | |
| R: CATGTTGGCAGCCTTCTTCG | ||||
|
| F:CCGAGGAGGAAGAAGAGGGG | 95°C 10 min, (95°C 20 s, 56°C 20 s, 72°C 40 s)× 35 cycles, 72°C 5 min | 300 | |
| R: TCCATCCAGCATCCCTCACA |