Whole-genome pre-amplification as a viable approach for genomic screening of FFPE-derived DNA samples
Rattachement africain : gb. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) enables comprehensive analysis of tumour genomes, but its use in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples is limited by DNA fragmentation and low yields. Whole-genome amplification (WGA) methods such as multiple displacement amplification (MDA) can boost DNA availability but distort copy-number alteration (CNA) profiles. DNA ligation-mediated MDA (DLMDA) mitigates this bias by reconstituting fragmented templates, yet its performance in FFPE-derived DNA remains uncertain. We compared paired DLMDA pre-amplified (2h, 8h) and non-pre-amplified FFPE prostate tumour samples from 22 archival blocks (5, 15 and 20 years old). DLMDA increased DNA yield by 42- to 86-fold, with global CNA patterns largely preserved. However, DLMDA significantly reduced the number of detected CNA deletions and amplifications. These effects were independent of both block age and reaction time. CNA dropouts were randomly distributed across the genome, indicating that DLMDA does not introduce regional bias. Our results show that DLMDA enables robust DNA yield recovery and avoids false-positive CNA artefacts, but at the cost of reduced CNA sensitivity. While suitable for CNA screening pipelines through WGS, further improvements are required to minimise the false-negative risk and improve the technique’s sensitivity for FFPE-based genomics.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Whole-genome pre-amplification as a viable approach for genomic screening of FFPE-derived DNA samples
- Date Crossref
- 29/03/2026
- Éditeur
- openRxiv
- Type
- posted-content
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.