Cited by 701Cancer Genomics and DiagnosticsPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsBRCA gene mutations in cancer

Analytical and clinical validation of a digital sequencing panel for quantitative, highly accurate evaluation of cell-free circulating tumor DNA

Open access
Lanman, Richard B., Mortimer, Stefanie A., Zill, Oliver A., Sebisanovic, Dragan, Lopez, Rene, Blau, Sibel, Collisson, Eric A., Divers, Stephen G. +8 more·2015·PLoS ONE

Abstract

Next-generation sequencing of cell-free circulating solid tumor DNA addresses two challenges in contemporary cancer care. First this method of massively parallel and deep sequencing enables assessment of a comprehensive panel of genomic targets from a single sample, and second, it obviates the need for repeat invasive tissue biopsies. Digital Sequencing™ is a novel method for high-quality sequencing of circulating tumor DNA simultaneously across a comprehensive panel of over 50 cancer-related genes with a simple blood test. Here we report the analytic and clinical validation of the gene panel. Analytic sensitivity down to 0.1% mutant allele fraction is demonstrated via serial dilution studies of known samples. Near-perfect analytic specificity (> 99.9999%) enables complete coverage of many genes without the false positives typically seen with traditional sequencing assays at mutant allele frequencies or fractions below 5%. We compared digital sequencing of plasma-derived cell-free DNA to tissue-based sequencing on 165 consecutive matched samples from five outside centers in patients with stage III-IV solid tumor cancers. Clinical sensitivity of plasma-derived NGS was 85.0%, comparable to 80.7% sensitivity for tissue. The assay success rate on 1,000 consecutive samples in clinical practice was 99.8%. Digital sequencing of plasma-derived DNA is indicated in advanced cancer patients to prevent repeated invasive biopsies when the initial biopsy is inadequate, unobtainable for genomic testing, or uninformative, or when the patient's cancer has progressed despite treatment. Its clinical utility is derived from reduction in the costs, complications and delays associated with invasive tissue biopsies for genomic testing.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0140712

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 79 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. [6]Rosen S. World Market for Cancer Diagnostics, 5th Edition. 2013.
  2. [15]Mandel P, Metais P. Les acides nucléiques du plasma sanguin chez l’homme. CR Acad Sci Paris. 1948; 142: 241– 3. 18875018
  3. [35]Gazdar AF, Kurvari V, Virmani A, Gollahon L, Sakaguchi M, Westerfield M, et al Characterization of paired tumor and non-tumor cell lines established from patients with breast cancer. Int J Cancer J Int Cancer. 1998; 78: 766– 774. 9833771
  4. [62]Nowell PC. The clonal evolution of tumor cell populations. Science. 1976; 194: 23– 28. 959840
  5. [80]Altman DG, Bland JM. Diagnostic tests. 1: Sensitivity and specificity. BMJ. 1994; 308: 1552 8019315 PMC2540489
  6. [81]Newcombe RG. Improved confidence intervals for the difference between binomial proportions based on paired data. Stat Med. 1998; 17: 2635– 2650. 9839354

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lanman, R. B., Mortimer, S. A., Zill, O. A., Sebisanovic, D., Lopez, R., Blau, S., Collisson, E. A., Divers, S. G., Hoon, D. S. B., Kopetz, E. S., Lee, J., Nikolinakos, P. G., Baca, A. M., Kermani, B. G., Eltoukhy, H., & Talasaz, A.
Affiliations
  • Guardant (United States) (US)
  • Northwest Medical Specialties (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Saint John's Health Center (US)
  • Samsung Medical Center (KR)
  • University Cancer and Blood Center (US)
Corresponding author
  • Lanman, Richard B.
  • Talasaz, AmirAli
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2015-10-16
Volume
10
Issue
10
Pages
e0140712
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1864344361
Cited by
695
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 66 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 60 · 2020: 82 · 2019: 92 · 2018: 102 · 2017: 91 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 3
FWCI
25.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (P30CA016672)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › BRCA gene mutations in cancer
Keywords
circulating tumor DNA, cell-free DNA, liquid biopsy, cancer gene panel, clinical validation, mutant allele fraction, solid tumors, biopsy alternative
MeSH terms
DNA, Neoplasm, Female, Humans, Male, Neoplasms, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review