[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-339401-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-339401-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","dna-quantity-and-quality-comparisons-between-cryopreserved-and-ffpe-tumors-from-matched-pan-cancer-samples-research-findings","DNA Quantity and Quality Comparisons between Cryopreserved and FFPE Tumors from Matched Pan-Cancer Samples - Research Findings","","Personalized cancer care depends on molecular characterization of tumors, yet clinical testing is typically performed on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue rather than frozen material. This study compared DNA quantity and quality between FFPE and cryopreserved samples from 38 matched human tumors across diverse cancer types. DNA yield and purity were quantified by UV spectrophotometry, while DNA quality was assessed using fragment microelectrophoresis to evaluate integrity and fragment size.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/","Healthcare",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/dna-quantity-and-quality-comparisons-between-cryopreserved-and-ffpe-tumors-from-matched-pan-cancer-samples-research-findings/339401/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/dna-quantity-and-quality-comparisons-between-cryopreserved-and-ffpe-tumors-from-matched-pan-cancer-samples-research-findings/339401.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Ivy","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-28","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",5,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"Why compare DNA from cryopreserved and FFPE tumor samples?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Clinical molecular assays often rely on FFPE tissue, while frozen tissue is considered a gold-standard analyte. The study tests whether cryopreserved samples provide higher DNA quantity and better DNA quality for DNA-based technologies.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How were DNA quantity, purity, and quality measured?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"DNA quantity and purity were measured by UV spectrophotometry. DNA quality was evaluated using a fragment microelectrophoresis analyzer to quantify integrity-related metrics and fragment distribution.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What did the results show about DNA yield and quality?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Cryopreserved tissue produced higher DNA yield per mg of tissue and improved quality metrics compared with FFPE samples, including increases in DNA quality number and the proportion of larger DNA fragments.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},339401,1791096809,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,100,105,109,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":108},7,40,"healthcare",{"id":110,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":55,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":106,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":112},549758252649,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/8000253669c5317157?_k=1778319167496531819","Article  \nDNA Quantity and Quality Comparisons between Cryopreserved and FFPE Tumors from Matched Pan-Cancer Samples  \nJeffrey Okojie 1,2, Nikole O’Neal 2, Mackenzie Burr 1, Peyton Worley 1, Isaac Packer 1, DeLaney Anderson 1, Jack Davis 1, Bridger Kearns 1, Kaniz Fatema 2, Ken Dixon 3,* and Jared J. Barrott 1,2,3,4, *  \nCitation: Okojie, J.; O’Neal, N.; Burr, M.; Worley, P.; Packer, I.; Anderson, D.; Davis, J.; Kearns, B.; Fatema, K.; Dixon, K.; et al. DNA Quantity and Quality Comparisons between Cryopreserved and FFPE Tumors from Matched Pan-Cancer Samples. Curr. Oncol. 2024, 31, 2441–2452 . [https://doi.org/10.3390/](https://doi.org/10.3390/)[ ](https://doi.org/10.3390/)curroncol31050183  \nReceived: 18 March 2024  \nRevised: 25 April 2024  \nAccepted: 27 April 2024  \nPublished: 28 April 2024  \nCopyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ([https://](https://)[ ](https://)[creativecommons.org/licenses/by/](creativecommons.org/licenses/by/)[ ](creativecommons.org/licenses/by/)[4.0/](4.0/)) .  \n1 Department of Cell Biology & Physiology, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA; [jokojie@student.byu.edu](jokojie@student.byu.edu) (J.O.); [burrm1@student.byu.edu](burrm1@student.byu.edu) (M.B.); [worleyp@student.byu.edu](worleyp@student.byu.edu) (P.W.); [packatk@student.byu.edu](packatk@student.byu.edu) (I.P.); [dgrace18@student.byu.edu](dgrace18@student.byu.edu) (D.A.); [jackwd@student.byu.edu](jackwd@student.byu.edu) (J.D.); [bkearns9@student.byu.edu](bkearns9@student.byu.edu) (B.K.)  \n2 Department of Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID 83209, USA; [nikioneal@isu.edu](nikioneal@isu.edu) (N.O.); [kanizfatema@isu.edu](kanizfatema@isu.edu) (K.F.)  \n3 Specicare, 690 Medical Park Ln, Gainesville, GA 30501, USA  \n4 Simmons Center for Cancer Research, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA  \n* Correspondence: [ken.dixon@specicare.com](ken.dixon@specicare.com) (K.D.); [jared_barrott@byu.edu](jared_barrott@byu.edu) (J.J.B.); Tel.: +1-833-242-2873 (K.D.); +1-801-422-0795 (J.J.B.)  \nAbstract: Personalized cancer care requires molecular characterization of neoplasms. While the research community accepts frozen tissues as the gold standard analyte for molecular assays, the source of tissue for testing in clinical cancer care comes almost universally from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue (FFPE) . As newer technologies emerge for DNA characterization that requires higher molecular weight DNA, it was necessary to compare the quality of DNA in terms of DNA length between FFPE and cryopreserved samples. We hypothesized that cryopreserved samples would yield higher quantity and superior quality DNA compared to FFPE samples. We analyzed DNA metrics by performing a head-to-head comparison between FFPE and cryopreserved samples from 38 human tumors representing various cancer types. DNA quantity and purity were measured by UV spectrophotometry, and DNA from cryopreserved tissue demonstrated a 4.2-fold increase in DNA yield per mg of tissue (p-value \u003C 0.001) . DNA quality was measured on a fragment microelectrophoresis analyzer, and again, DNA from cryopreserved tissue demonstrated a 223% increase in the DNA quality number and a 9-fold increase in DNA fragments > 40,000 bp (p-value \u003C 0.0001) . DNA from the cryopreserved tissues was superior to the DNA from FFPE samples in terms of DNA yield and quality.  \nKeywords: biospecimen management; DNA quality; cryopreservation; formalin-fixed; cancer  \n1. Introduction  \nWith increasing efforts to embrace personalized cancer care, DNA sequencing of tumors and normal tissue is becoming more commonplace. Initiatives, such as the NCIMATCH and NCI-ComboMATCH trials, which are being spearheaded by the National Cancer Institute, are based on the hypothesis that genomically guided decisions will result","cbCairHD9fzTU934","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCairHD9fzTU934","pdf",1552942,12,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction","[{\"question\":\"Why compare DNA from cryopreserved and FFPE tumor samples?\",\"answer\":\"Clinical molecular assays often rely on FFPE tissue, while frozen tissue is considered a gold-standard analyte. The study tests whether cryopreserved samples provide higher DNA quantity and better DNA quality for DNA-based technologies.\"},{\"question\":\"How were DNA quantity, purity, and quality measured?\",\"answer\":\"DNA quantity and purity were measured by UV spectrophotometry. DNA quality was evaluated using a fragment microelectrophoresis analyzer to quantify integrity-related metrics and fragment distribution.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the results show about DNA yield and quality?\",\"answer\":\"Cryopreserved tissue produced higher DNA yield per mg of tissue and improved quality metrics compared with FFPE samples, including increases in DNA quality number and the proportion of larger DNA fragments.\"}]","DNA Quantity and Quality Comparisons between Cryopreserved and FFPE Tumors from Matched Pan-Cancer Samples - Research Findings | PDF",1790030057]