Search

Circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) fragments have characteristics that are specific to the cell types that release them. Current methods for cfDNA deconvolution typically use disease tailored marker selection in a limited number of bulk tissues or cell lines. Here, we utilize single cell transcriptome data as a comprehensive cellular reference set for disease-agnostic cfDNA cell-of-origin analysis. We correlate cfDNA-inferred nucleosome spacing with gene expression to rank the relative contribution of over 490 cell types to plasma cfDNA. In 744 healthy individuals and patients, we uncover cell type signatures in support of emerging disease paradigms in oncology and prenatal care. We train predictive models that can differentiate patients with colorectal cancer (84.7%), early-stage breast cancer (90.1%), multiple myeloma (AUC 95.0%), and preeclampsia (88.3%) from matched controls. Importantly, our approach performs well in ultra-low coverage cfDNA datasets and can be readily transferred to diverse clinical settings for the expansion of liquid biopsy., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Multiple myeloma (MM), is a heterogeneous disease in which chromosomal abnormalities are important for prognostic risk stratification. Cytogenetic profiling with FISH on plasma cells from bone marrow samples (BM-PCs) is the current gold standard, but variable infiltration of plasma cells or failed aspiration can hamper this process. Ultra-low coverage sequencing (ULCS) of circulating cell-free DNA (ccfDNA) may offer a minimally invasive alternative for the work-up of these cases. We compared ULCS, aCGH and FISH on selected BM-PCs in a routine setting with ULCS of ccfDNA for the detection of somatic copy number aberrations (CNAs) in MM., Methods: Purified CD138+ BM-PCs of 23 MM patients at initiation of their treatment were subjected to aCGH, FISH and ULCS. Paired samples of peripheral blood-ccfDNA obtained at diagnosis were analyzed by ULCS and compared to the results found in BM-PCs., Results: Using ULCS of ccfDNA, cytogenetic markers were identified in 18 out of 23 patients; five cases could not be analyzed due to low (≤3%) tumor fraction (TF). High similarity between CNA profiles of BM-PCs and ccfDNA was found. Moreover, 78% of the ccfDNA profiles resulted in the same risk classification as the routine FISH and/or BM-PCs ULCS and aCGH. Chromothripsis was detected in five patients; these had the highest TF values (range 7.1% to 42%) in our series and their profiles showed other high-risk anomalies., Conclusion: This proof-of-principle study indicates that ULCS of ccfDNA can reveal CNAs in MM and should be explored further as a cost-efficient alternative, especially in cases where BM-PC purification fails., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

The majority (99%) of individuals with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11.2DS) have a deletion that is caused by non-allelic homologous recombination between two of four low copy repeat clusters on chromosome 22q11.2 (LCR22s). However, in a small subset of patients, atypical deletions are observed with at least one deletion breakpoint within unique sequence between the LCR22s. The position of the chromosome breakpoints and the mechanisms driving those atypical deletions remain poorly studied. Our large-scale, whole genome sequencing study of >1500 subjects with 22q11.2DS identified six unrelated individuals with atypical deletions of different types. Using a combination of whole genome sequencing data and fiber-fluorescence in situ hybridization, we mapped the rearranged alleles in these subjects. In four of them, the distal breakpoints mapped within one of the LCR22s and we found that the deletions likely occurred by replication-based mechanisms. Interestingly, in two of them, an inversion probably preceded inter-chromosomal 'allelic' homologous recombination between differently oriented LCR22-D alleles. Inversion associated allelic homologous recombination (AHR) may well be a common mechanism driving (atypical) deletions on 22q11.2., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)