2 research outputs found

    λŒ€μž₯μ•” 진단 및 μ˜ˆν›„ 예츑λ₯Ό μœ„ν•œ ν˜ˆμ•‘λ‚΄ μ’…μ–‘DNA의 genome-wide λ©”ν‹Έν™” 및 fragmentomics 마컀 λ°œκ΅΄μ— κ΄€ν•œ 연ꡬ

    Get PDF
    ν•™μœ„λ…Όλ¬Έ(박사) -- μ„œμšΈλŒ€ν•™κ΅λŒ€ν•™μ› : μœ΅ν•©κ³Όν•™κΈ°μˆ λŒ€ν•™μ› λΆ„μžμ˜ν•™ 및 λ°”μ΄μ˜€μ œμ•½ν•™κ³Ό, 2022.2. κΉ€νƒœμœ .Non-genetic signatures from liquid biopsy samples are emerging as feasible markers of cancer because plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is representative of the patient's systemic state. Non-genetic signatures include cfDNA methylation, topology of cfDNA, and cfDNA fragmentomics. DNA methylation has somatic tissue specific patterns, and DNA fragment size is one of the most representative characteristics of cfDNA. In particular, cfDNA from the plasma of cancer patients, which contains circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), can be representative of the status of both the primary tumor and minimal residual disease. For this reason, the tissue of origin (TOO) could be determined from ctDNA methylation patterns. Fragment size of ctDNA could also be a useful marker for cancer patients. However, studies on the comprehensive applications of non-genetic signatures for cancer diagnosis, monitoring, and predicted prognosis are still needed to define and validate the role of non-genetic markers in clinical practice. Here, I show 1) an accurate prediction model that was developed using a machine learning algorithm for the comprehensive analysis of multiple CpG sites. Although many DNA methylation markers have been reported, previously reported markers were based on a single marker and a western population. My prediction model includes 305 CpG sites and was built by a machine learning algorithm based on tissue samples from Korean colorectal cancer patients. The prediction model showed high performance not only in databases of pan-cancer tissue samples but also those based on plasma from cancer patients. In addition, the prognosis of colorectal cancer patients was accurately predicted with a subset of the 305 CpG sites. Next, I showed that 2) the fragmentation ratio of specific lengths of DNA could be a valuable prognostic marker for colorectal cancer patients. Many recent studies have shown ctDNA fragment size is shorter than that of cfDNA derived from healthy tissue and have attempted to apply this to cancer diagnosis; however, the data are limited, and the only application has been for cancer diagnosis. In order to fill this gap, cfDNA fragment size was analyzed using targeted deep sequencing from paired ends. I demonstrated that ctDNA fragment length was related to variant allele frequency, and the prognosis of colorectal cancer patients could be predicted by the fragmentation ratio at a specific sampling time in longitudinal samples. In summary, blood based non-genetic signatures are significantly associated with the status of colorectal cancer and can be used to predict patient prognosis.암을 μ§„λ‹¨ν•˜κ³  λͺ¨λ‹ˆν„°λ§ν•˜κ³  μ˜ˆν›„λ₯Ό μ˜ˆμΈ‘ν•˜λŠ” 것에 μžˆμ–΄μ„œ 앑체생검은 맀우 μ€‘μš”ν•œ ν•œκ°€μ§€ λ°©λ²•μœΌλ‘œμ¨ μ£Όλͺ©λ°›κ³  μžˆλ‹€. νŠΉνžˆλ‚˜ μƒˆλ‘œμš΄ 마컀둜써 λΉ„μœ μ „μ  μ‹œκ·Έλ‹ˆμ²˜ 듀은 λ”μš± λŒ€λ‘λ˜κ³  μžˆλ‹€. κ·ΈλŸ¬ν•œ μ΄μœ λŠ” μ•”ν™˜μžμ˜ ν˜ˆμ•‘μ’…μ–‘DNAλŠ” λ‹€λ₯Έ μ–΄λ– ν•œ λ§ˆμ»€λ³΄λ‹€ μ’…ν•©μ μœΌλ‘œ 신체λ₯Ό λ°˜μ˜ν•˜κ³  있고, μ›λ°œμ•”μ„ λŒ€ν‘œν•˜λŠ”λ° μžˆμ–΄μ„œ λ§Žμ€ 정보λ₯Ό κ°–λŠ”λ‹€ 것에 μžˆλ‹€. μ΄λŸ¬ν•œ ν˜ˆμ•‘μ’…μ–‘DNAλŠ” μœ μ „μ  마컀뿐만 μ•„λ‹ˆλΌ, λΉ„μœ μ „μ  마컀 즉, DNA λ©”ν‹Έλ ˆμ΄μ…˜ or DNA ν”„λž˜κ·Έλ¨ΌνŠΈ 크기 λ“± λ‹€μ–‘ν•œ λΆ„μžμ  νŠΉμ„±λ“€μ„ λ°˜μ˜ν•œλ‹€. DNA λ©”ν‹Έλ ˆμ΄μ…˜ 은 쑰직에 λŒ€ν•œ νŠΉμ΄ν•œ νŒ¨ν„΄μ„ κ°–κ³  있으며, DNA ν”„λž˜κ·Έλ¨ΌνŠΈ 크기에 λŒ€ν•œ νŠΉμ΄μ„±μ€ 무세포핡산 자체의 νŠΉμ§• 쀑 ν•˜λ‚˜κ³ , 이λ₯Ό ν™œμš©ν•˜λ €λŠ” λ…Έλ ₯듀이 λ§Žμ•„μ§€κ³  μžˆλ‹€. μ΄λŸ¬ν•œ νŠΉμ„±μ„ ν¬κ΄„μ μœΌλ‘œ ν™œμš©ν•˜κΈ° μœ„ν•˜μ—¬, 톡합적인 뢄석이 ν•„μš”ν•˜κ³  μƒˆλ‘œμš΄ 마컀의 발꡴이 ν•„μš”ν•˜λ‹€. λ³Έ λ…Όλ¬Έμ—μ„œλŠ” 1) 기쑴에 DNA λ©”ν‹Έλ ˆμ΄μ…˜ 은 많이 보고 λ˜μ–΄μžˆμ§€λ§Œ, λ‹¨μΌλ§ˆμ»€ 그리고 μ„œμ–‘μΈλ“€ μ€‘μ‹¬μœΌλ‘œ 보고가 λ˜μ–΄μ™”λ‹€. ν•˜μ§€λ§Œ, λ©”ν‹Έλ ˆμ΄μ…˜ νŒ¨ν„΄μ€ μΈμ’…κ°„μ˜ 차이도 μ–΄λŠμ •λ„ 있고, 쑰직의 νŠΉμ΄μ„±μ„ λ°˜μ˜ν•˜κΈ° μœ„ν•΄μ„œλŠ” λ‹¨μΌλ§ˆμ»€λ³΄λ‹€λŠ” λ‹€μ–‘ν•œ 마컀λ₯Ό ν™œμš©ν•˜μ—¬ 예츑λ ₯을 λ†’μ΄λŠ” 것이 μ€‘μš”ν•˜λ‹€. λ”°λΌμ„œ λ‚˜λŠ” 709개의 ν•œκ΅­μΈ λŒ€μž₯μ•” 쑰직을 μ΄μš©ν•˜μ—¬ 얻은 λ©”ν‹Έλ ˆμ΄μ…˜ 데이터λ₯Ό μ΄μš©ν•˜μ—¬ λ¨Έμ‹ λŸ¬λ‹ 기반 305개 마컀λ₯Ό ν™œμš©ν•˜λŠ” 진단 예츑 λͺ¨λΈμ„ κ΅¬μΆ•ν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. κ΅¬μΆ•ν•œ λͺ¨λΈμ€ 쑰직 데이터뿐 λ§Œμ•„λ‹ˆλΌ 혈μž₯ 무세포핡산 λ©”ν‹Έλ ˆμ΄μ…˜ λ°μ΄ν„°μ—μ„œλ„ λ˜ν•œ 높은 예츑λ ₯을 λ³΄μ˜€μœΌλ©°, 마컀의 μ„œλΈŒμ…‹μ„ μ΄μš©ν•œ μ˜ˆν›„ μ˜ˆμΈ‘λ„ λ˜ν•œ κ°€λŠ₯ν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. λ‹€μŒμœΌλ‘œ 2) λ¬΄μ„Έν¬ν•΅μ‚°μ˜ ν”„λž˜κ·Έλ¨ΌνŠΈ ν¬κΈ°λŠ” 무세포핡산 만이 κ°–λŠ” λΆ„μžμ  νŠΉμ„±μ΄λ‹€. μ΅œκ·Όμ— μ•”ν™˜μžμ—μ„œ μœ λž˜ν•œ λ¬΄μ„Έν¬ν•΅μ‚°μ˜ ν¬κΈ°λŠ” μ²΄μ„±λ³€μ΄μ—μ„œ 특이적으둜 μ‚¬μ΄μ¦ˆ 차이가 λ‚œλ‹€λŠ” 점을 μ΄μš©ν•˜λŠ” 연ꡬ듀이 μ£Όλ˜μ—ˆλ‹€. μœ μ „μ²΄ 전체λ₯Ό μ΄μš©ν•˜μ—¬ μ•” 특이적 진단 마컀λ₯Ό λ°œκ΅΄ν•˜λŠ” λ‚΄μš© 그리고 νŒ¨λ„ μ‹œν€€μ‹±μ„ μ΄μš©ν•˜μ—¬ νŠΉμ • λ³€μ΄λ“€μ—μ„œ 크기의 차이λ₯Ό μ΄μš©ν•˜μ—¬ λ³€μ΄μ˜ κ²€μΆœν™•λ₯ μ„ λ†’μ΄λŠ” 방법등이 λŒ€ν‘œμ μΈ μ˜ˆμ΄λ‹€. ν•˜μ§€λ§Œ 진단 μ΄μ™Έμ˜ ν™œμš©μΈ‘λ©΄μ—μ„œλŠ” 아직 연ꡬ할 뢀뢄이 λ§Žλ‹€. μ΄λŸ¬ν•œ 간극을 맀꾸기 μœ„ν•˜μ—¬ ν˜ˆμ•‘μ’…μ–‘DNA의 ν”„λž˜κ·Έλ¨ΌνŠΈ 크기 뢄석을 μ§„ν–‰ν•˜μ˜€λ‹€. μš°λ¦¬λŠ” paired end μ‹œν€€μ‹± 기반의 νŒ¨λ„ μ‹œν€€μ‹± 데이터λ₯Ό ν™œμš©ν•˜μ—¬ ν•΅μ‚° λΆ„μžμ˜ μ‹€μ œ 크기λ₯Ό κ³„μ‚°ν•˜μ˜€κ³ , μ΄λŸ¬ν•œ 크기가 μ›λ°œμ•” μœ λž˜μ— μ˜ν•¨μ΄λΌλŠ” 것을 λ°μ΄ν„°μƒμœΌλ‘œ 증λͺ…ν–ˆλ‹€. λ‚˜μ•„κ°€, ν•œν™˜μžλ‘œλΆ€ν„° μœ λž˜ν•œ λ‹€μ–‘ν•œ 치료 μ „/ν›„ λŒ€μž₯μ•” ν˜ˆμ•‘ μƒ˜ν”Œμ—μ„œ νŠΉμ • μ‹œμ μ—μ„œ 크기λ₯Ό ν™œμš©ν•œ λ§ˆμ»€κ°€ μ˜ˆν›„ μ˜ˆμΈ‘μ— ν†΅κ³„μ μœΌλ‘œ μœ μ˜λ―Έν•œ νŒŒμ›Œλ₯Ό κ°–λŠ” 것을 ν™•μΈν•˜μ˜€λ‹€.TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT i TABLE OF CONTENTS iv LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES v I. Use of an optimized machine learning algorithm to discover DNA methylation markers from Korean colorectal cancer patients 1 Abstract 2 Introduction 4 Experimental Design 6 Results 11 Discussion 35 II. Combined analysis of ctDNA mutation and fragment size for predicting prognosis of colorectal cancer 38 Abstract 39 Introduction 41 Experimental Design 43 Results 48 Discussion 64 III. CONCLUSION 66 REFERENCES 68 ABSTRACT IN KOREAN 76 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES I. Use of an optimized machine learning algorithm to discover DNA methylation markers from Korean colorectal cancer patients TABLE 1. Clinicopathological information of the COPM cohort. 12 FIGURE 1. In silico simulation for setting the optimal number of DMRs. 14 FIGURE 2. Pipeline for building the prediction model and discovering cancer-specific markers. 15 FIGURE 3. Statistical differences according to tissue type. 16 FIGURE 4. Statistical differences according to tissue type. 17 FIGURE 5. Prediction model performance using 305 DNA methylation markers for cancer diagnosis. 18 FIGURE 6. tSNE analysis with CpG methylation level. 20 FIGURE 7. Permutation test for error rate of TOO (n = 1,000) 22 FIGURE 8. The PCA (A, C) and tSNE (B, D) analyses were performed for data and sample types. 23 FIGURE 9. Prediction model performance using intersected 76 DNA methylation markers for cancer diagnosis. 24 FIGURE 10. Re-constructed prediction model performance for other cancer and sample types. 25 FIGURE 11. Chromatin status correlated with the probe set (ChromHMM). 27 FIGURE 12. Pathway analysis using various databases through Metascape. 28 FIGURE 13. Correlation between methylation level and gene expression. 29 FIGURE 14. The risk score using the subset of 305 probe set as prognostic marker. 30 FIGURE 15. Risk score using the total of 305 probe sets as prognostic markers. 31 FIGURE 16. The association risk score with cancer patient age. 32 FIGURE 17. The association risk score with cancer patient sex. 33 FIGURE 18. The association risk score with cancer stage. 34 II. Combined analysis of ctDNA mutation and fragment size for predicting prognosis of colorectal cancer FIGURE 1. DNA fragment size calculations. 47 Table 1. Clinicopathological information of the prospective patient cohort. 49 FIGURE 2. Distribution curve of cfDNA fragment size in patients with colorectal cancer (n=62) and in healthy controls (n=50). 51 FIGURE 3. Distribution curve of cfDNA fragments by mutation type. 52 FIGURE 4. Distribution curve of the VAF of somatic mutations detected in plasma cfDNA. 55 FIGURE 5. The association between clonality and ctDNA fragment size. 56 FIGURE 6. Correlation between the maximum VAF and ctDNA fragment size. 57 FIGURE 7. Distribution curves for ctDNA fragments from patients with more than 10% somatic mutations detected in plasma (n=33). 58 FIGURE 8. Calculation of PFS according to the RECIST 1.1. guideline. 60 FIGURE 9. ROC analysis for calculating the optimal cutoff values used to classify patients into the responder and non-responder groups. 61 FIGURE 10. Survival plot for each sampling time point and variables. 62 FIGURE 11. Clinical response monitoring using the fragmentation ratio (AUCp1 / AUCp2). 63λ°•

    μ°¨μ„ΈλŒ€ μ—ΌκΈ°μ„œμ—΄ 뢄석을 μ΄μš©ν•œ λŒ€μž₯μ•” ν™˜μžμ˜ ν˜ˆμ•‘λ‚΄ μ’…μ–‘DNA κ²€μΆœ 및 μ˜ˆν›„ μ˜ˆμΈ‘μ— κ΄€ν•œ 연ꡬ

    Get PDF
    ν•™μœ„λ…Όλ¬Έ (석사)-- μ„œμšΈλŒ€ν•™κ΅ λŒ€ν•™μ› : μœ΅ν•©κ³Όν•™κΈ°μˆ λŒ€ν•™μ› λΆ„μžμ˜ν•™ 및 λ°”μ΄μ˜€μ œμ•½ν•™κ³Ό, 2018. 2. κΉ€νƒœμœ .Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology is emerging as a major technique for genotyping circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and for patient monitoring. However, Results of NGS is subject to numerous errors. In this study, we isolated circulating cfDNA and genomic DNA from 39 available tumours from 54 patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). Deep targeted sequencing was performed for a panel of 10 genes that are recurrently mutated in CRC. To reduce sequencing error, we devised a de-noising procedure and calculated the concordance of somatic variants between cfDNA and tumour tissue sequencing data. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for somatic alterations in the 10 genes were increased from 84.5%, 74.6%, and 76.9% to 87.3%, 92.0%, and 91.1%, respectively, after de-noising. This approach improved the detection of somatic alterations in advanced CRC cfDNA. We could selectively detect clinically important somatic alterations for variant allele frequencies of 0.27%–79.42%. Patients with high cfDNA concentrations had more detectable somatic mutant fragments and larger liver metastatic lesions than patients with lower concentrations. These results demonstrate the suitability of de-noised deep targeted sequencing for cfDNA genotyping, and provide insights into strategies for monitoring metastatic lesions in patients with advanced CRC.INTRODUCTION 1 METERIALS AND METHODS - 3 RESULTS - 8 DISCUSSION 36 REFERENCES 41 ABSTRACT IN KOREAN - 45Maste
    corecore