Cargando…

Method comparison studies of telomere length measurement using qPCR approaches: A critical appraisal of the literature

Use of telomere length (TL) as a biomarker for various environmental exposures and diseases has increased in recent years. Various methods have been developed to measure telomere length. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based methods remain wide-spread for population-based studies due to the high-thr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lindrose, Alyssa R., McLester-Davis, Lauren W. Y., Tristano, Renee I., Kataria, Leila, Gadalla, Shahinaz M., Eisenberg, Dan T. A., Verhulst, Simon, Drury, Stacy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7817045/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33471860
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245582
_version_ 1783638562997010432
author Lindrose, Alyssa R.
McLester-Davis, Lauren W. Y.
Tristano, Renee I.
Kataria, Leila
Gadalla, Shahinaz M.
Eisenberg, Dan T. A.
Verhulst, Simon
Drury, Stacy
author_facet Lindrose, Alyssa R.
McLester-Davis, Lauren W. Y.
Tristano, Renee I.
Kataria, Leila
Gadalla, Shahinaz M.
Eisenberg, Dan T. A.
Verhulst, Simon
Drury, Stacy
author_sort Lindrose, Alyssa R.
collection PubMed
description Use of telomere length (TL) as a biomarker for various environmental exposures and diseases has increased in recent years. Various methods have been developed to measure telomere length. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based methods remain wide-spread for population-based studies due to the high-throughput capability. While several studies have evaluated the repeatability and reproducibility of different TL measurement methods, the results have been variable. We conducted a literature review of TL measurement cross-method comparison studies that included a PCR-based method published between January 1, 2002 and May 25, 2020. A total of 25 articles were found that matched the inclusion criteria. Papers were reviewed for quality of methodologic reporting of sample and DNA quality, PCR assay characteristics, sample blinding, and analytic approaches to determine final TL. Overall, methodologic reporting was low as assessed by two different reporting guidelines for qPCR-based TL measurement. There was a wide range in the reported correlation between methods (as assessed by Pearson’s r) and few studies utilized the recommended intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for assessment of assay repeatability and methodologic comparisons. The sample size for nearly all studies was less than 100, raising concerns about statistical power. Overall, this review found that the current literature on the relation between TL measurement methods is lacking in validity and scientific rigor. In light of these findings, we present reporting guidelines for PCR-based TL measurement methods and results of analyses of the effect of assay repeatability (ICC) on statistical power of cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. Additional cross-laboratory studies with rigorous methodologic and statistical reporting, adequate sample size, and blinding are essential to accurately determine assay repeatability and replicability as well as the relation between TL measurement methods.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7817045
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78170452021-01-28 Method comparison studies of telomere length measurement using qPCR approaches: A critical appraisal of the literature Lindrose, Alyssa R. McLester-Davis, Lauren W. Y. Tristano, Renee I. Kataria, Leila Gadalla, Shahinaz M. Eisenberg, Dan T. A. Verhulst, Simon Drury, Stacy PLoS One Research Article Use of telomere length (TL) as a biomarker for various environmental exposures and diseases has increased in recent years. Various methods have been developed to measure telomere length. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based methods remain wide-spread for population-based studies due to the high-throughput capability. While several studies have evaluated the repeatability and reproducibility of different TL measurement methods, the results have been variable. We conducted a literature review of TL measurement cross-method comparison studies that included a PCR-based method published between January 1, 2002 and May 25, 2020. A total of 25 articles were found that matched the inclusion criteria. Papers were reviewed for quality of methodologic reporting of sample and DNA quality, PCR assay characteristics, sample blinding, and analytic approaches to determine final TL. Overall, methodologic reporting was low as assessed by two different reporting guidelines for qPCR-based TL measurement. There was a wide range in the reported correlation between methods (as assessed by Pearson’s r) and few studies utilized the recommended intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for assessment of assay repeatability and methodologic comparisons. The sample size for nearly all studies was less than 100, raising concerns about statistical power. Overall, this review found that the current literature on the relation between TL measurement methods is lacking in validity and scientific rigor. In light of these findings, we present reporting guidelines for PCR-based TL measurement methods and results of analyses of the effect of assay repeatability (ICC) on statistical power of cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. Additional cross-laboratory studies with rigorous methodologic and statistical reporting, adequate sample size, and blinding are essential to accurately determine assay repeatability and replicability as well as the relation between TL measurement methods. Public Library of Science 2021-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7817045/ /pubmed/33471860 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245582 Text en © 2021 Lindrose et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Lindrose, Alyssa R.
McLester-Davis, Lauren W. Y.
Tristano, Renee I.
Kataria, Leila
Gadalla, Shahinaz M.
Eisenberg, Dan T. A.
Verhulst, Simon
Drury, Stacy
Method comparison studies of telomere length measurement using qPCR approaches: A critical appraisal of the literature
title Method comparison studies of telomere length measurement using qPCR approaches: A critical appraisal of the literature
title_full Method comparison studies of telomere length measurement using qPCR approaches: A critical appraisal of the literature
title_fullStr Method comparison studies of telomere length measurement using qPCR approaches: A critical appraisal of the literature
title_full_unstemmed Method comparison studies of telomere length measurement using qPCR approaches: A critical appraisal of the literature
title_short Method comparison studies of telomere length measurement using qPCR approaches: A critical appraisal of the literature
title_sort method comparison studies of telomere length measurement using qpcr approaches: a critical appraisal of the literature
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7817045/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33471860
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245582
work_keys_str_mv AT lindrosealyssar methodcomparisonstudiesoftelomerelengthmeasurementusingqpcrapproachesacriticalappraisaloftheliterature
AT mclesterdavislaurenwy methodcomparisonstudiesoftelomerelengthmeasurementusingqpcrapproachesacriticalappraisaloftheliterature
AT tristanoreneei methodcomparisonstudiesoftelomerelengthmeasurementusingqpcrapproachesacriticalappraisaloftheliterature
AT katarialeila methodcomparisonstudiesoftelomerelengthmeasurementusingqpcrapproachesacriticalappraisaloftheliterature
AT gadallashahinazm methodcomparisonstudiesoftelomerelengthmeasurementusingqpcrapproachesacriticalappraisaloftheliterature
AT eisenbergdanta methodcomparisonstudiesoftelomerelengthmeasurementusingqpcrapproachesacriticalappraisaloftheliterature
AT verhulstsimon methodcomparisonstudiesoftelomerelengthmeasurementusingqpcrapproachesacriticalappraisaloftheliterature
AT drurystacy methodcomparisonstudiesoftelomerelengthmeasurementusingqpcrapproachesacriticalappraisaloftheliterature