Name:
35915225.pdf
Size:
1.547Mb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Identified with Open Access button
Affiliation
Division of Cancer Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UKIssue Date
2022
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Over the past decade, various liquid biopsy techniques have emerged as viable alternatives to the analysis of traditional tissue biopsy samples. Such surrogate 'biopsies' offer numerous advantages, including the relative ease of obtaining serial samples and overcoming the issues of interpreting one or more small tissue samples that might not reflect the entire tumour burden. To date, the majority of research in the area of liquid biopsies has focused on blood-based biomarkers, predominantly using plasma-derived circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA). However, ctDNA can also be obtained from various non-blood sources and these might offer unique advantages over plasma ctDNA. In this Review, we discuss advances in the analysis of ctDNA from non-blood sources, focusing on urine, cerebrospinal fluid, and pleural or peritoneal fluid, but also consider other sources of ctDNA. We discuss how these alternative sources can have a distinct yet complementary role to that of blood ctDNA analysis and consider various technical aspects of non-blood ctDNA assay development. We also reflect on the settings in which non-blood ctDNA can offer distinct advantages over plasma ctDNA and explore some of the challenges associated with translating these alternative assays from academia into clinical use.Citation
Tivey A, Church M, Rothwell D, Dive C, Cook N. Circulating tumour DNA - looking beyond the blood. Nature reviews Clinical oncology. 2022 Sep;19(9):600-12. PubMed PMID: 35915225. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC9341152 Ingelheim, Biocartis, GRAIL and Merck, and has received research funding from Angle, Amgen, Astex Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bioven, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Carrick Therapeutics, Celgene, Clearbridge Biomedics, Epigene Therapeutics, GlaxoSmithKline, Menarini, Merck AG, Neomed Therapeutics, Novartis, Roche, Taiho Oncology and Thermo Fisher Scientific. N.C. has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Avacta, Bayer, Boehringer, Eisai, Merck, Orion, Pfizer, RedX, Roche, Starpharma, Stemline Tarveda, Taiho Oncology and UCB. The other authors declare no competing interests. Epub 2022/08/02. eng.Journal
Nature Reviews Clinical OncologyDOI
10.1038/s41571-022-00660-yPubMed ID
35915225Additional Links
https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41571-022-00660-yType
ArticleLanguage
enae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1038/s41571-022-00660-y