Dataset Information

Assessment of the real-time PCR and different digital PCR platforms for DNA quantification.

ABSTRACT: Digital PCR (dPCR) is beginning to supersede real-time PCR (qPCR) for quantification of nucleic acids in many different applications. Several analytical properties of the two most commonly used dPCR platforms, namely the QX100 system (Bio-Rad) and the 12.765 array of the Biomark system (Fluidigm), have already been evaluated and compared with those of qPCR. However, to the best of our knowledge, direct comparison between the three of these platforms using the same DNA material has not been done, and the 37 K array on the Biomark system has also not been evaluated in terms of linearity, analytical sensitivity and limit of quantification. Here, a first assessment of qPCR, the QX100 system and both arrays of the Biomark system was performed with plasmid and genomic DNA from human cytomegalovirus. With use of PCR components that alter the efficiency of qPCR, each dPCR platform demonstrated consistent copy-number estimations, which indicates the high resilience of dPCR. Two approaches, one considering the total reaction volume and the other considering the effective reaction size, were used to assess linearity, analytical sensitivity and variability. When the total reaction volume was considered, the best performance was observed with qPCR, followed by the QX100 system and the Biomark system. In contrast, when the effective reaction size was considered, all three platforms showed almost equal limits of detection and variability. Although dPCR might not always be more appropriate than qPCR for quantification of low copy numbers, dPCR is a suitable method for robust and reproducible quantification of viral DNA, and a promising technology for the higher-order reference measurement method.

SUBMITTER: Pavsic J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4706846 | biostudies-other | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessment of the real-time PCR and different digital PCR platforms for DNA quantification.

Pavšič Jernej J Žel Jana J Milavec Mojca M

Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry 20151031 1

Digital PCR (dPCR) is beginning to supersede real-time PCR (qPCR) for quantification of nucleic acids in many different applications. Several analytical properties of the two most commonly used dPCR platforms, namely the QX100 system (Bio-Rad) and the 12.765 array of the Biomark system (Fluidigm), have already been evaluated and compared with those of qPCR. However, to the best of our knowledge, direct comparison between the three of these platforms using the same DNA material has not been done, ...[more]

PMID: 26521179

Similar Datasets

Project description:Cell-associated (CA) HIV-1 RNA is considered a potential marker for assessment of viral reservoir dynamics and antiretroviral therapy (ART) response in HIV-infected patients. Recent studies employed sensitive seminested real-time quantitative (q)PCR to quantify CA HIV-1 RNA. Digital PCR has been recently described as an alternative PCR-based technique for absolute quantification with higher accuracy compared to qPCR. Here, a comparison was made between the droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) and the seminested qPCR for quantification of unspliced (us) and multiply spliced (ms) CA HIV-1 RNA. Synthetic RNA standards and CA HIV-1 RNA from infected patients on and off ART (N = 34) were quantified with both methods. Correlations were observed between the methods both for serially diluted synthetic standards (usRNA: R2 = 0.97, msRNA: R2 = 0.92) and patient-derived samples (usRNA: R2 = 0.51, msRNA: R2 = 0.87). Seminested qPCR showed better quantitative linearity, accuracy and sensitivity in the quantification of synthetic standards than ddPCR, especially in the lower quantification ranges. Both methods demonstrated equally high detection rate of usRNA in patient samples on and off ART (91%), whereas ddPCR detected msRNA in larger proportion of samples from ART-treated patients (p = 0.13). We observed an average agreement between the methods for usRNA quantification in patient samples, albeit with a large standard deviation (bias = 0.05±0.75 log10). However, a bias of 0.94±0.36 log10 was observed for msRNA. No-template controls were consistently negative in the seminested qPCR, but yielded a positive ddPCR signal for some wells. Therefore, the false positive signals may have affected the detection power of ddPCR in this study. Digital PCR is promising for HIV nucleic acid quantification, but the false positive signals need further attention. Quantitative assays for CA HIV RNA have the potential to improve monitoring of patients on ART and to be used in clinical studies aimed at HIV eradication, but should be cross-validated by multiple laboratories prior to wider use.

Dataset Information

Assessment of the real-time PCR and different digital PCR platforms for DNA quantification.

Publications

Assessment of the real-time PCR and different digital PCR platforms for DNA quantification.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets