ArticlePloS one2015
Performance of Droplet Digital PCR in Non-Invasive Fetal RHD Genotyping - Comparison with a Routine Real-Time PCR Based Approach.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanoplate based digital PCR assay for effective quantification of plasma HPV circulating tumor DNA.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
- Risk Minimization of Hemolytic Disease of the Fetus and Newborn Using Droplet Digital PCR Method for Accurate Fetal Genotype Assessment ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Detection of cell-free foetal DNA fraction in female-foetus bearing pregnancies using X-chromosomal insertion/deletion polymorphisms examined by digital droplet PCR.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Two Reliable Methodical Approaches for Non-InvasiveDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Introduction of Noninvasive Prenatal Testing for Blood Group and Platelet Antigens from Cell-Free Plasma DNA Using Digital PCR.Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie · 2020Article
- Copy number determination of the gene for the human pancreatic polypeptide receptor NPY4R using read depth analysis and droplet digital PCR.BMC biotechnology · 2019Article
- Current status of spent embryo media research for preimplantation genetic testing.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2019Review
- Current, Emerging, and Future Applications of Digital PCR in Non-Invasive Prenatal Diagnosis.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2018Review
- Copy number of pancreatic polypeptide receptor gene NPY4R correlates with body mass index and waist circumference.PloS one · 2018Article
- Detection of pseudorabies virus by duplex droplet digital PCR assay.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2018Article
- Applicability of digital PCR to the investigation of pediatric-onset genetic disorders.Biomolecular detection and quantification · 2016Review
- Evaluation of the performance of quantitative detection of the Listeria monocytogenes prfA locus with droplet digital PCR.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Detection and characterization of circulating cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) from maternal circulation requires an extremely sensitive and precise method due to very low cffDNA concentration. In our study, droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) was implemented for fetal RHD genotyping from maternal plasma to compare this new quantification alternative with real-time PCR (qPCR) as a golden standard for quantitative analysis of cffDNA. In the first stage of study, a DNA quantification standard was used. Clinical samples, including 10 non-pregnant and 35 pregnant women, were analyzed as a next step. Both methods' performance parameters-standard curve linearity, detection limit and measurement precision-were evaluated. ddPCR in comparison with qPCR has demonstrated sufficient sensitivity for analysing of cffDNA and determination of fetal RhD status from maternal circulation, results of both methods strongly correlated. Despite the more demanding workflow, ddPCR was found to be slightly more precise technology, as evaluated using quantitative standard. Regarding the clinical samples, the precision of both methods equalized with decreasing concentrations of tested DNA samples. In case of cffDNA with very low concentrations, variance parameters of both techniques were comparable. Detected levels of fetal cfDNA in maternal plasma were slightly higher than expected and correlated significantly with gestational age as measured by both methods (ddPCR r = 0.459; qPCR r = 0.438).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.