Cell-free DNA as a potential alternative to genomic DNA in genetic studies.

IF 2.8 Q1 GENETICS & HEREDITY
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics Pub Date : 2025-09-09 eCollection Date: 2025-09-01 DOI:10.1093/nargab/lqaf119
Jingyu Zeng, Huanhuan Zhu, Yu Wang, Guodan Zeng, Panhong Liu, Rijing Ou, Xianmei Lan, Yuhui Zheng, Chenhui Zhao, Linxuan Li, Haiqiang Zhang, Jianhua Yin, Mingzhi Liao, Yan Zhang, Xin Jin
{"title":"Cell-free DNA as a potential alternative to genomic DNA in genetic studies.","authors":"Jingyu Zeng, Huanhuan Zhu, Yu Wang, Guodan Zeng, Panhong Liu, Rijing Ou, Xianmei Lan, Yuhui Zheng, Chenhui Zhao, Linxuan Li, Haiqiang Zhang, Jianhua Yin, Mingzhi Liao, Yan Zhang, Xin Jin","doi":"10.1093/nargab/lqaf119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Next-generation sequencing has greatly advanced genomics, enabling large-scale studies of population genetics and complex traits. Genomic DNA (gDNA) from white blood cells has traditionally been the main data source, but cell-free DNA (cfDNA), found in bodily fluids as fragmented DNA, is increasingly recognized as a valuable biomarker in clinical and genetic studies. However, a direct comparison between cfDNA and gDNA has not been fully explored. In this study, we analyzed cfDNA and gDNA from 186 healthy individuals, using the same sequencing platform. We compared sequencing quality, variant detection, allele frequencies (AF), genotype concordance, population structure, and genomic association results (genome-wide association study and expression quantitative trait locus). While cfDNA showed higher duplication rates and lower effective sequencing depth, both DNA types displayed similar quality metrics at the same depth. We also observed that significant depth differences between cfDNA and gDNA were mainly found in centromeric regions. While gDNA identified more variants with more uniform coverage, AF spectra, population structure, and genomic associations were largely consistent between the two DNA types. This study provides a detailed comparison of cfDNA and gDNA, highlighting the potential of cfDNA as an alternative to gDNA in genomic research. Our findings could serve as a reference for future studies on cfDNA and gDNA.</p>","PeriodicalId":33994,"journal":{"name":"NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics","volume":"7 3","pages":"lqaf119"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12408905/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/nargab/lqaf119","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Next-generation sequencing has greatly advanced genomics, enabling large-scale studies of population genetics and complex traits. Genomic DNA (gDNA) from white blood cells has traditionally been the main data source, but cell-free DNA (cfDNA), found in bodily fluids as fragmented DNA, is increasingly recognized as a valuable biomarker in clinical and genetic studies. However, a direct comparison between cfDNA and gDNA has not been fully explored. In this study, we analyzed cfDNA and gDNA from 186 healthy individuals, using the same sequencing platform. We compared sequencing quality, variant detection, allele frequencies (AF), genotype concordance, population structure, and genomic association results (genome-wide association study and expression quantitative trait locus). While cfDNA showed higher duplication rates and lower effective sequencing depth, both DNA types displayed similar quality metrics at the same depth. We also observed that significant depth differences between cfDNA and gDNA were mainly found in centromeric regions. While gDNA identified more variants with more uniform coverage, AF spectra, population structure, and genomic associations were largely consistent between the two DNA types. This study provides a detailed comparison of cfDNA and gDNA, highlighting the potential of cfDNA as an alternative to gDNA in genomic research. Our findings could serve as a reference for future studies on cfDNA and gDNA.

无细胞DNA在遗传学研究中作为基因组DNA的潜在替代品。
下一代测序极大地推进了基因组学,使大规模研究群体遗传学和复杂性状成为可能。传统上,来自白细胞的基因组DNA (gDNA)一直是主要的数据来源,但在体液中以片段DNA形式发现的无细胞DNA (cfDNA)越来越被认为是临床和遗传研究中有价值的生物标志物。然而,cfDNA和gDNA之间的直接比较尚未得到充分的探讨。在这项研究中,我们使用相同的测序平台分析了186名健康个体的cfDNA和gDNA。我们比较了测序质量、变异检测、等位基因频率(AF)、基因型一致性、群体结构和基因组关联结果(全基因组关联研究和表达数量性状位点)。虽然cfDNA具有较高的重复率和较低的有效测序深度,但两种DNA类型在相同深度下显示出相似的质量指标。我们还观察到cfDNA和gDNA之间的显著深度差异主要存在于着丝粒区域。虽然gDNA鉴定出更多的变异,覆盖范围更均匀,但两种DNA类型之间的AF谱、群体结构和基因组关联在很大程度上是一致的。本研究提供了cfDNA和gDNA的详细比较,强调了cfDNA作为基因组研究中gDNA替代品的潜力。本研究结果可为今后cfDNA和gDNA的研究提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
2.20%
发文量
95
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信