Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 5, 2026
Detection of Cell-Free DNA in Blood Plasma Samples of Cancer Patients
Published on: September 9, 2020
Advantages of Single-Stranded DNA Over Double-Stranded DNA Library Preparation for Capturing Cell-Free Tumor DNA in
Jing Zhu1, Jinyong Huang2, Peng Zhang2
1Laboratory of Medical Genetics, Harbin Medical University, and The Key Laboratory of Preservation of Human Genetic Resources and Disease Control in China, Chinese Ministry of Education, 157 Baojian Road, Harbin, 150081, Heilongjiang, China. zhuj@ems.hrbmu.edu.cn.
Background:
Single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) libraries have been shown to enrich shorter and more degraded DNA fragments than double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) libraries.
Objective:
In this study, we evaluated whether ssDNA libraries captured more circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA).
Methods:
We prepared dsDNA, ssDNA and pure-ssDNA (capture the preexisting ssDNA) libraries using ten plasma cfDNA samples. After low-pass whole genome sequencing, we calculated a duplicate rate to estimate library complexity and compared the library insert sizes between the different library methods. Finally, we estimated the ctDNA content and plasma genomic abnormality (PGA) score, an indicator of ctDNA burden.
Results:
27 libraries were prepared and sequenced from the ten cfDNA samples. The duplicate rate in the ssDNA and pure-ssDNA libraries was significantly lower than in the dsDNA libraries (p < 0.001 and p < 0.01, respectively). ctDNA content and PGA scores were consistently higher in the ssDNA and pure-ssDNA libraries than in the matched dsDNA libraries (p < 0.005). The higher ctDNA content in ssDNA libraries was associated with smaller library insert size.
Conclusions:
ssDNA libraries preserve more diversity and capture more ctDNA than dsDNA libraries. The ssDNA library method is preferred when performing genomic analysis of ctDNA.
