Cancers (Mar 2019)

Circulating Cell-Free DNA and RNA Analysis as Liquid Biopsy: Optimal Centrifugation Protocol

  • Laure Sorber,
  • Karen Zwaenepoel,
  • Julie Jacobs,
  • Koen De Winne,
  • Sofie Goethals,
  • Pablo Reclusa,
  • Kaat Van Casteren,
  • Elien Augustus,
  • Filip Lardon,
  • Geert Roeyen,
  • Marc Peeters,
  • Jan Van Meerbeeck,
  • Christian Rolfo,
  • Patrick Pauwels

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers11040458
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 11, no. 4
p. 458

Abstract

Read online

The combined analysis of circulating cell-free (tumor) DNA (cfDNA/ctDNA) and circulating cell-free (tumor) RNA (cfRNA/ctRNA) shows great promise in determining the molecular profile of cancer patients. Optimization of the workflow is necessary to achieve consistent and reproducible results. In this study, we compared five centrifugation protocols for the optimal yield of both cfDNA/ctDNA and cfRNA/ctRNA. These protocols varied in centrifugation speed, ambient temperature, time, and number of centrifugation steps. Samples from 33 participants were collected in either BD Vacutainer K2EDTA (EDTA) tubes or cell-free DNA BCT® (Streck) tubes. cfDNA concentration and fragment size, and cfRNA concentration were quantitated in all samples by digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) and quantitative PCR (qPCR). The KRAS-mutated ctDNA and ctRNA fraction was determined via ddPCR. In EDTA tubes, the protocol generating both plasma and platelets was found to produce high quality cfDNA and cfRNA concentrations. Two-step, high-speed centrifugation protocols were associated with high cfDNA but low cfRNA concentrations. High cfRNA concentrations were generated by a one-step, low-speed protocol. However, this coincided with a high amount of genomic DNA (gDNA) contamination. In Streck tubes, two-step, high-speed centrifugation protocols also generated good quality, high cfDNA concentration. However, these tubes are not compatible with cfRNA analysis.

Keywords