Abstract 6012: Comparison of pre-analytical methods for DNA methylation analysis of cfDNA

Abstract

Abstract Liquid biopsies in the form of cell-free circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) isolated from blood plasma or serum have shown great promise to be used as minimally-invasive markers in cancer patients providing an insight into the composition of both primary tumor and metastases, and an opportunity to assess clonal dynamics throughout the course of disease. CtDNA carries not only tumor- specific changes in its sequence but also distinctive epigenetic marks, namely DNA methylation patterns similar to the patterns in the primary tumor. Deregulation of tissue-specific DNA methylation patterns is an early event in carcinogenesis holding great promise to be exploited for early detection of cancer. However, in contrast to mutation detection, targeted DNA methylation sequencing of cfDNA remains a challenge due to low concentration and heavy fragmentation. The limiting step in detection of any analyte is the recovery of the DNA molecules. The pre-analytical steps in the DNA methylation detection pipeline include extraction of cfDNA molecules and their conversion using sodium bisulfite. Bisulfite conversion is a harsh chemical reaction that induces further fragmentation and degradation of already scarce cfDNA. In this study we compared commercial methods for cfDNA extraction and for bisulfite conversion to evaluate the yield, degradation and procedural loss. We compared five commercial kits for cfDNA extraction from blood plasma, three column-based (Qiagen’s QIAamp Circulating nucleic acids kit, Norgen’s Plasma/Serum Cell-Free Circulating DNA Purification and Macherey-Nagel’s NucleoSpin® Plasma XS) and two based on magnetic beads cleanup (Bioo Scientific’s Next Prep magnetic Cell-Free Circulating DNA isolation kitand Applied Biosystems’ Magmax Cell-Free Circulating DNA isolation kit. The kits used for bisulfite conversion were Zymo EZ DNA Methylation Lightning with column based purification and with magnetic beads purification, Zymo EZ DNA Methylation Direct with column based purification and with magnetic bead purification, Qiagen Epitect Fast DNA Bisulfite and Diagenode Premium Bisulfite kits. Same samples were processed by each of the kits, Sample degradation was determined using Agilent Bioanalyzer dsDNA kit. Yield was evaluated by Picogreen, absolute qPCR for single-copy gene and for contamination of gDNA by a B-cell specific assay, while procedural loss was determined based on the recovery of a synthetic spike-in. Citation Format: Miljana Tanic, Oluwadunni Emiloju, Pawan Dhami, Stephan Beck. Comparison of pre-analytical methods for DNA methylation analysis of cfDNA. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 6012.