Cargando…

A comparison between quantitative PCR and droplet digital PCR technologies for circulating microRNA quantification in human lung cancer

BACKGROUND: Selected microRNAs (miRNAs) that are abnormally expressed in the serum of patients with lung cancer have recently been proposed as biomarkers of this disease. The measurement of circulating miRNAs, however, requires a highly reliable quantification method. Quantitative real-time PCR (qPC...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Campomenosi, Paola, Gini, Elisabetta, Noonan, Douglas M., Poli, Albino, D’Antona, Paola, Rotolo, Nicola, Dominioni, Lorenzo, Imperatori, Andrea
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4991011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27538962
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12896-016-0292-7
_version_ 1782448781343588352
author Campomenosi, Paola
Gini, Elisabetta
Noonan, Douglas M.
Poli, Albino
D’Antona, Paola
Rotolo, Nicola
Dominioni, Lorenzo
Imperatori, Andrea
author_facet Campomenosi, Paola
Gini, Elisabetta
Noonan, Douglas M.
Poli, Albino
D’Antona, Paola
Rotolo, Nicola
Dominioni, Lorenzo
Imperatori, Andrea
author_sort Campomenosi, Paola
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Selected microRNAs (miRNAs) that are abnormally expressed in the serum of patients with lung cancer have recently been proposed as biomarkers of this disease. The measurement of circulating miRNAs, however, requires a highly reliable quantification method. Quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) is the most commonly used method, but it lacks reliable endogenous reference miRNAs for normalization of results in biofluids. When used in absolute quantification, it must rely on the use of external calibrators. Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) is a recently introduced technology that overcomes the normalization issue and may facilitate miRNA measurement. Here we compared the performance of absolute qPCR and ddPCR techniques for quantifying selected miRNAs in the serum. RESULTS: In the first experiment, three miRNAs, proposed in the literature as lung cancer biomarkers (miR-21, miR-126 and let-7a), were analyzed in a set of 15 human serum samples. Four independent qPCR and four independent ddPCR amplifications were done on the same samples and used to estimate the precision and correlation of miRNA measurements obtained with the two techniques. The precision of the two methods was evaluated by calculating the Coefficient of Variation (CV) of the four independent measurements obtained with each technique. The CV was similar or smaller in ddPCR than in qPCR for all miRNAs tested, and was significantly smaller for let-7a (p = 0.028). Linear regression analysis of the miRNA values obtained with qPCR and ddPCR showed strong correlation (p < 0.001). To validate the correlation obtained with the two techniques in the first experiment, in a second experiment the same miRNAs were measured in a larger cohort (70 human serum samples) by both qPCR and ddPCR. The correlation of miRNA analyses with the two methods was significant for all three miRNAs. Moreover, in our experiments the ddPCR technique had higher throughput than qPCR, at a similar cost-per-sample. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses of serum miRNAs performed with qPCR and ddPCR were largely concordant. Both qPCR and ddPCR can reliably be used to quantify circulating miRNAs, however, ddPCR revealed similar or greater precision and higher throughput of analysis. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12896-016-0292-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4991011
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49910112016-08-20 A comparison between quantitative PCR and droplet digital PCR technologies for circulating microRNA quantification in human lung cancer Campomenosi, Paola Gini, Elisabetta Noonan, Douglas M. Poli, Albino D’Antona, Paola Rotolo, Nicola Dominioni, Lorenzo Imperatori, Andrea BMC Biotechnol Methodology Article BACKGROUND: Selected microRNAs (miRNAs) that are abnormally expressed in the serum of patients with lung cancer have recently been proposed as biomarkers of this disease. The measurement of circulating miRNAs, however, requires a highly reliable quantification method. Quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) is the most commonly used method, but it lacks reliable endogenous reference miRNAs for normalization of results in biofluids. When used in absolute quantification, it must rely on the use of external calibrators. Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) is a recently introduced technology that overcomes the normalization issue and may facilitate miRNA measurement. Here we compared the performance of absolute qPCR and ddPCR techniques for quantifying selected miRNAs in the serum. RESULTS: In the first experiment, three miRNAs, proposed in the literature as lung cancer biomarkers (miR-21, miR-126 and let-7a), were analyzed in a set of 15 human serum samples. Four independent qPCR and four independent ddPCR amplifications were done on the same samples and used to estimate the precision and correlation of miRNA measurements obtained with the two techniques. The precision of the two methods was evaluated by calculating the Coefficient of Variation (CV) of the four independent measurements obtained with each technique. The CV was similar or smaller in ddPCR than in qPCR for all miRNAs tested, and was significantly smaller for let-7a (p = 0.028). Linear regression analysis of the miRNA values obtained with qPCR and ddPCR showed strong correlation (p < 0.001). To validate the correlation obtained with the two techniques in the first experiment, in a second experiment the same miRNAs were measured in a larger cohort (70 human serum samples) by both qPCR and ddPCR. The correlation of miRNA analyses with the two methods was significant for all three miRNAs. Moreover, in our experiments the ddPCR technique had higher throughput than qPCR, at a similar cost-per-sample. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses of serum miRNAs performed with qPCR and ddPCR were largely concordant. Both qPCR and ddPCR can reliably be used to quantify circulating miRNAs, however, ddPCR revealed similar or greater precision and higher throughput of analysis. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12896-016-0292-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-08-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4991011/ /pubmed/27538962 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12896-016-0292-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Methodology Article
Campomenosi, Paola
Gini, Elisabetta
Noonan, Douglas M.
Poli, Albino
D’Antona, Paola
Rotolo, Nicola
Dominioni, Lorenzo
Imperatori, Andrea
A comparison between quantitative PCR and droplet digital PCR technologies for circulating microRNA quantification in human lung cancer
title A comparison between quantitative PCR and droplet digital PCR technologies for circulating microRNA quantification in human lung cancer
title_full A comparison between quantitative PCR and droplet digital PCR technologies for circulating microRNA quantification in human lung cancer
title_fullStr A comparison between quantitative PCR and droplet digital PCR technologies for circulating microRNA quantification in human lung cancer
title_full_unstemmed A comparison between quantitative PCR and droplet digital PCR technologies for circulating microRNA quantification in human lung cancer
title_short A comparison between quantitative PCR and droplet digital PCR technologies for circulating microRNA quantification in human lung cancer
title_sort comparison between quantitative pcr and droplet digital pcr technologies for circulating microrna quantification in human lung cancer
topic Methodology Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4991011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27538962
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12896-016-0292-7
work_keys_str_mv AT campomenosipaola acomparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT ginielisabetta acomparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT noonandouglasm acomparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT polialbino acomparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT dantonapaola acomparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT rotolonicola acomparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT dominionilorenzo acomparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT imperatoriandrea acomparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT campomenosipaola comparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT ginielisabetta comparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT noonandouglasm comparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT polialbino comparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT dantonapaola comparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT rotolonicola comparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT dominionilorenzo comparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer
AT imperatoriandrea comparisonbetweenquantitativepcranddropletdigitalpcrtechnologiesforcirculatingmicrornaquantificationinhumanlungcancer