Giulia Barbieri, Giulia Cassioli, Ada Kura, Rebecca Orsi, Alberto Magi, Martina Berteotti, Giusi Maria Scaturro, Elena Lotti, Anna Maria Gori, Rossella Marcucci, Betti Giusti, Elena Sticchi
{"title":"数字液滴聚合酶链式反应与定量聚合酶链式反应在脂蛋白（a）环IV型2重复多态性遗传表征中的比较。","authors":"Giulia Barbieri, Giulia Cassioli, Ada Kura, Rebecca Orsi, Alberto Magi, Martina Berteotti, Giusi Maria Scaturro, Elena Lotti, Anna Maria Gori, Rossella Marcucci, Betti Giusti, Elena Sticchi","doi":"10.1002/jcla.24998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level variability, related to atherothrombotic risk increase, is mainly attributed to <i>LPA</i> gene, encoding apolipoprotein(a), with kringle IV type 2 (KIV2) copy number variation (CNV) acting as the primary genetic determinant. Genetic characterization of Lp(a) is in continuous growth; nevertheless, the peculiar structural characteristics of this variant constitute a significant challenge to the development of effective detection methods. The aim of the study was to compare quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) and digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) in the evaluation of KIV2 repeat polymorphism.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We analysed 100 subjects tested for cardiovascular risk in which Lp(a) plasma levels were assessed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Correlation analysis between CNV values obtained with the two methods was slightly significant (<i>R</i> = 0.413, <i>p</i> = 0.00002), because of the wider data dispersion in qPCR compared with ddPCR. Internal controls C1, C2 and C3 measurements throughout different experimental sessions revealed the superior stability of ddPCR, which was supported by a reduced intra/inter-assay coefficient of variation determined in this method compared to qPCR. A significant inverse correlation between Lp(a) levels and CNV values was confirmed for both techniques, but it was higher when evaluated by ddPCR than qPCR (<i>R</i> = −0.393, <i>p</i> = 0.000053 vs <i>R</i> = −0.220, <i>p</i> = 0.028, respectively). When dividing subjects into two groups according to 500 mg/L Lp(a) cut-off value, a significantly lower number of KIV2 repeats emerged among subjects with greater Lp(a) levels, with stronger evidence in ddPCR than in qPCR (<i>p</i> = 0.000013 and <i>p</i> = 0.001, respectively).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Data obtained support a better performance of ddPCR in the evaluation of KIV2 repeat polymorphism.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15509,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jcla.24998","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Digital droplet PCR versus quantitative PCR for lipoprotein (a) kringle IV type 2 repeat polymorphism genetic characterization\",\"authors\":\"Giulia Barbieri, Giulia Cassioli, Ada Kura, Rebecca Orsi, Alberto Magi, Martina Berteotti, Giusi Maria Scaturro, Elena Lotti, Anna Maria Gori, Rossella Marcucci, Betti Giusti, Elena Sticchi\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jcla.24998\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level variability, related to atherothrombotic risk increase, is mainly attributed to <i>LPA</i> gene, encoding apolipoprotein(a), with kringle IV type 2 (KIV2) copy number variation (CNV) acting as the primary genetic determinant. Genetic characterization of Lp(a) is in continuous growth; nevertheless, the peculiar structural characteristics of this variant constitute a significant challenge to the development of effective detection methods. The aim of the study was to compare quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) and digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) in the evaluation of KIV2 repeat polymorphism.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We analysed 100 subjects tested for cardiovascular risk in which Lp(a) plasma levels were assessed.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Correlation analysis between CNV values obtained with the two methods was slightly significant (<i>R</i> = 0.413, <i>p</i> = 0.00002), because of the wider data dispersion in qPCR compared with ddPCR. Internal controls C1, C2 and C3 measurements throughout different experimental sessions revealed the superior stability of ddPCR, which was supported by a reduced intra/inter-assay coefficient of variation determined in this method compared to qPCR. A significant inverse correlation between Lp(a) levels and CNV values was confirmed for both techniques, but it was higher when evaluated by ddPCR than qPCR (<i>R</i> = −0.393, <i>p</i> = 0.000053 vs <i>R</i> = −0.220, <i>p</i> = 0.028, respectively). When dividing subjects into two groups according to 500 mg/L Lp(a) cut-off value, a significantly lower number of KIV2 repeats emerged among subjects with greater Lp(a) levels, with stronger evidence in ddPCR than in qPCR (<i>p</i> = 0.000013 and <i>p</i> = 0.001, respectively).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Data obtained support a better performance of ddPCR in the evaluation of KIV2 repeat polymorphism.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15509,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jcla.24998\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jcla.24998\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jcla.24998","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Digital droplet PCR versus quantitative PCR for lipoprotein (a) kringle IV type 2 repeat polymorphism genetic characterization
Background
Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level variability, related to atherothrombotic risk increase, is mainly attributed to LPA gene, encoding apolipoprotein(a), with kringle IV type 2 (KIV2) copy number variation (CNV) acting as the primary genetic determinant. Genetic characterization of Lp(a) is in continuous growth; nevertheless, the peculiar structural characteristics of this variant constitute a significant challenge to the development of effective detection methods. The aim of the study was to compare quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) and digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) in the evaluation of KIV2 repeat polymorphism.
Methods
We analysed 100 subjects tested for cardiovascular risk in which Lp(a) plasma levels were assessed.
Results
Correlation analysis between CNV values obtained with the two methods was slightly significant (R = 0.413, p = 0.00002), because of the wider data dispersion in qPCR compared with ddPCR. Internal controls C1, C2 and C3 measurements throughout different experimental sessions revealed the superior stability of ddPCR, which was supported by a reduced intra/inter-assay coefficient of variation determined in this method compared to qPCR. A significant inverse correlation between Lp(a) levels and CNV values was confirmed for both techniques, but it was higher when evaluated by ddPCR than qPCR (R = −0.393, p = 0.000053 vs R = −0.220, p = 0.028, respectively). When dividing subjects into two groups according to 500 mg/L Lp(a) cut-off value, a significantly lower number of KIV2 repeats emerged among subjects with greater Lp(a) levels, with stronger evidence in ddPCR than in qPCR (p = 0.000013 and p = 0.001, respectively).
Conclusions
Data obtained support a better performance of ddPCR in the evaluation of KIV2 repeat polymorphism.
期刊介绍：
Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis publishes original articles on newly developing modes of technology and laboratory assays, with emphasis on their application in current and future clinical laboratory testing. This includes reports from the following fields: immunochemistry and toxicology, hematology and hematopathology, immunopathology, molecular diagnostics, microbiology, genetic testing, immunohematology, and clinical chemistry.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
