Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Feb:6:e2100198.
doi: 10.1200/PO.21.00198.

Plasma Cell-Free DNA Integrity Assessed by Automated Electrophoresis Predicts the Achievement of Pathologic Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Breast Cancer

Affiliations

Plasma Cell-Free DNA Integrity Assessed by Automated Electrophoresis Predicts the Achievement of Pathologic Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Breast Cancer

Gabriella Cirmena et al. JCO Precis Oncol. 2022 Feb.

Abstract

Purpose: The study of plasma cell-free DNA integrity (cfDI) has shown potential for providing useful information in neoplastic patients. The aim of this study is to estimate the accuracy of an electrophoresis-based method for cfDI evaluation in the assessment of pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients with breast cancer (BC) undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).

Patients and methods: Fifty-one patients with BC undergoing anthracycline-/taxane-based NACT were recruited. Plasma samples were collected from each patient at diagnosis (t0), after anthracycline administration (t1), and after NACT completion (t2). The concentration of differently sized cell-free DNA fragments was assessed by automated electrophoresis. cfDI, expressed as cfDI index, was calculated as the ratio of 321-1,000 bp sized fragment concentration to 150-220 bp sized fragment concentration assessed at t2. cfDI index was then used to build an exploratory classifier for BC response to NACT, directly comparing its sensitivity and specificity with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), through bootstrapped logistic regression.

Results: cfDI index was assessed on 38 plasma samples collected from as many patients at t2, maintaining a 30/70 ratio between pCR and non-pCR patients. cfDI index showed an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in predicting the achievement of pCR of 81.6, with a cutoff above 2.71 showing sensitivity = 81.8 and specificity = 81.5. The combination of cfDI index and MRI showed, in case of concordance, an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 92.6 with a predictive value of complete response of 87.5 and a predictive value of absence of complete response of 94.7.

Conclusion: cfDI index measured after NACT completion shows great potential in the assessment of pCR in patients with BC. The evaluation of its use in combination with MRI is strongly warranted in prospective studies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Lucia Del MastroHonoraria: Roche, Novartis, Lilly, MSD OncologyConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche, Novartis, MSD, Pfizer, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Genomic Health, Lilly, Seattle Genetics, Eisai, Pierre Fabre, Daiichi SankyoTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche, Pfizer, Celgene Gabriele ZoppoliResearch Funding: Thermo Fisher Scientific (Inst)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: AstraZeneca UK concerning methods for SLFN11 detection in cancer samples and its correlation with clinical outcome, Davide Bedognetti and Wouter Hendricxk from SIDRA Medicine, Doha, concerning in vitro experiments with SLFN11 and cancer models, European patent no. 102019000018989 concerning a multidomain method for prediction of one-year mortality in senior patients diagnosed with cancerTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Novartis, RocheUncompensated Relationships: Breast International Group, Roche, Breast International Group/International Breast Cancer Study Group, AstraZeneca, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Figures

FIG 1.
FIG 1.
cfDI index correlates with the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. (A) Boxplots of cell-free DNA fragment concentration assessed on 38 samples collected at t2 from as many patients (11 pCR and 26 nR). (B) Boxplot of 150-220 bp sized fragment concentration in six healthy controls, 27 nR, and 11 pCR patients at t2. The concentration of 150-220 bp sized fragments assessed at t2 was significantly higher in nR patients compared with the pCR ones (P = .048) and the healthy controls (P = .0096). No significant difference in the same parameter was observed between pCR patients and the healthy controls (P = .93). (C) Boxplot of cfDI index in nR and pCR patients. A significant correlation (P = .0014) between cfDI index and the achievement of pCR was observed. cfDI, cell-free DNA integrity; nR, noncomplete responders; pCR, pathologic complete response.
FIG 2.
FIG 2.
cfDI index achieves a comparable accuracy to MRI in predicting pathologic complete response. (A) cfDI index ROC curve. AUC amounted to 0.816 (95% CI, 0.676 to 0.957). (B) MRI ROC curve. AUC amounted to 0.771 (95% CI, 0.614 to 0.928). AUC, area under the ROC curve; cfDI, cell-free DNA integrity; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; ROC, receiver operating characteristic.
FIG 3.
FIG 3.
The combination of MRI and cfDI index augments the accuracy in pathologic complete response prediction. MRI and cfDI index concordantly classified 27 of 38 patients with breast cancer. Of these, eight were classified as complete responders, whereas 19 as nR. MRI and cfDI index were discordant in 11 of 38 patients. Of these, five were classified as complete responders by MRI and as nR by cfDI index, whereas six were classified as nR by MRI and as complete responders by cfDI index. When concordant, cfDI index and MRI achieved a predictive value of complete response of 0.875 and a predictive value of noncomplete response of 0.947. cCR, clinical complete response; cfDI, cell-free DNA integrity; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; nR, noncomplete responders; pCR, pathologic complete response.

References

    1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries CA Cancer J Clin 71209–2492021 - PubMed
    1. DeSantis CE, Ma J, Gaudet MM, et al. Breast cancer statistics, 2019 CA Cancer J Clin 69438–4512019 - PubMed
    1. Pathak M, Dwivedi SN, Deo SVS, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens in treatment of breast cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol. Syst Rev. 2018;7:89. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: The CTNeoBC pooled analysis Lancet 384164–1722014 - PubMed
    1. Shuai Y, Ma L.Prognostic value of pathologic complete response and the alteration of breast cancer immunohistochemical biomarkers after neoadjuvant chemotherapy Pathol Res Pract 21529–332019 - PubMed

Publication types

Substances