使用不同实时定量PCR解释方法的定量标准和临床样本之间PCR效率的变化

Q4 Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
B. Jeon
{"title":"使用不同实时定量PCR解释方法的定量标准和临床样本之间PCR效率的变化","authors":"B. Jeon","doi":"10.46300/91011.2020.14.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The analysis of the Ct and standard curve produced by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a well-established method for the quantification of nucleic acids. However, this method assumes that the PCR efficiency between the unknown specimen and standard is equal, resulting in the possibility of significant inaccuracies due to the presence of inhibitory agents in the unknown specimen. Although numerous methods have been proposed to correct this issue, the understanding of the differences in PCR efficiencies in clinical samples is limited. In this study, 1185 cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA real-time PCR test results from 106 batches were analyzed. The PCR efficiencies were calculated using the cpD2, maxE, Cy0, maxRatio and window-of-linearity (WoL) methods. The concentrations were calculated using the cpD2, Cy0, maxRatio, WoL, and take off point (TOP) methods. The coefficient of variation (CV) in the efficiency of the quantification standards was less than 5% in all methods. Positive samples with high quantification values demonstrated lower PCR efficiency compared to the quantification standards. This suggests possible inaccuracies in quantification using quantification standards in clinical samples.","PeriodicalId":53488,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Biology and Biomedical Engineering","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Variation in PCR Efficiencies between Quantification Standards and Clinical Specimens using Different Real-Time Quantitative PCR Interpretation Methods\",\"authors\":\"B. Jeon\",\"doi\":\"10.46300/91011.2020.14.6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The analysis of the Ct and standard curve produced by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a well-established method for the quantification of nucleic acids. However, this method assumes that the PCR efficiency between the unknown specimen and standard is equal, resulting in the possibility of significant inaccuracies due to the presence of inhibitory agents in the unknown specimen. Although numerous methods have been proposed to correct this issue, the understanding of the differences in PCR efficiencies in clinical samples is limited. In this study, 1185 cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA real-time PCR test results from 106 batches were analyzed. The PCR efficiencies were calculated using the cpD2, maxE, Cy0, maxRatio and window-of-linearity (WoL) methods. The concentrations were calculated using the cpD2, Cy0, maxRatio, WoL, and take off point (TOP) methods. The coefficient of variation (CV) in the efficiency of the quantification standards was less than 5% in all methods. Positive samples with high quantification values demonstrated lower PCR efficiency compared to the quantification standards. This suggests possible inaccuracies in quantification using quantification standards in clinical samples.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53488,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Biology and Biomedical Engineering\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Biology and Biomedical Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.46300/91011.2020.14.6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Biology and Biomedical Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46300/91011.2020.14.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

实时聚合酶链反应(PCR)产生的Ct和标准曲线分析是一种成熟的核酸定量方法。然而,该方法假设未知标本和标准品之间的PCR效率相等,这可能导致由于未知标本中存在抑制剂而导致显著不准确。虽然已经提出了许多方法来纠正这个问题,但对临床样品中PCR效率差异的理解是有限的。本研究对106批1185份巨细胞病毒(CMV) DNA实时PCR检测结果进行了分析。采用cpD2、maxE、Cy0、maxRatio和线性窗(WoL)法计算PCR效率。使用cpD2、Cy0、maxRatio、WoL和起飞点(TOP)法计算浓度。所有方法的定量标准效率变异系数(CV)均小于5%。与定量标准相比,高定量值的阳性样品的PCR效率较低。这表明在临床样品中使用定量标准进行定量时可能存在不准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Variation in PCR Efficiencies between Quantification Standards and Clinical Specimens using Different Real-Time Quantitative PCR Interpretation Methods
The analysis of the Ct and standard curve produced by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a well-established method for the quantification of nucleic acids. However, this method assumes that the PCR efficiency between the unknown specimen and standard is equal, resulting in the possibility of significant inaccuracies due to the presence of inhibitory agents in the unknown specimen. Although numerous methods have been proposed to correct this issue, the understanding of the differences in PCR efficiencies in clinical samples is limited. In this study, 1185 cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA real-time PCR test results from 106 batches were analyzed. The PCR efficiencies were calculated using the cpD2, maxE, Cy0, maxRatio and window-of-linearity (WoL) methods. The concentrations were calculated using the cpD2, Cy0, maxRatio, WoL, and take off point (TOP) methods. The coefficient of variation (CV) in the efficiency of the quantification standards was less than 5% in all methods. Positive samples with high quantification values demonstrated lower PCR efficiency compared to the quantification standards. This suggests possible inaccuracies in quantification using quantification standards in clinical samples.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Biology and Biomedical Engineering
International Journal of Biology and Biomedical Engineering Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (all)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Topics: Molecular Dynamics, Biochemistry, Biophysics, Quantum Chemistry, Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, Immunology, Neurophysiology, Genetics, Population Dynamics, Dynamics of Diseases, Bioecology, Epidemiology, Social Dynamics, PhotoBiology, PhotoChemistry, Plant Biology, Microbiology, Immunology, Bioinformatics, Signal Transduction, Environmental Systems, Psychological and Cognitive Systems, Pattern Formation, Evolution, Game Theory and Adaptive Dynamics, Bioengineering, Biotechnolgies, Medical Imaging, Medical Signal Processing, Feedback Control in Biology and Chemistry, Fluid Mechanics and Applications in Biomedicine, Space Medicine and Biology, Nuclear Biology and Medicine.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信