ArticlePloS one2023
Inhibition of the PCR by genomic DNA.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of Universal Primer Sets for Zika Virus Envelope Gene Amplification and Sequencing.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Identification of Marker Immunoglobulin Rearrangements for Use by HAT-PCR in Myeloma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- HAT-PCR is non-inferior to NGS when quantifying measurable residual disease for myeloma.British journal of haematology · 2026Article
- In-depth comparison of methods to isolate RNA from common human cell lines.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- HAT-PCR Enables Sensitive Quantification of Minimal Residual Disease in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and Myeloma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsqPCR, is widely used for quantifying minimal residual disease (MRD) and is conventionally performed according to guidelines proposed by the EuroMRD consortium. However it often fails when quantifying MRD levels below 10-4. By contrast, HAT-PCR, a recent modification designed to minimise false-positive results, can quantify MRD down to 10-6.
methodsThe factors leading to failure of conventional qPCR to quantify low levels of MRD were studied by analysing PCR reagents, protocol and primers and by testing for inhibition by adding primers to a plasmid amplification system. Complementary primers, ending in either G/C or A/T, were used to determine the effect of the 3' end of a primer.
resultsInhibition of conventional PCR resulted from interaction of primers with genomic DNA leading to exponential amplification of nonspecific amplicons. It was observed with approximately half of the EuroMRD J primers tested. Inhibition by a primer was significantly related to primer Tm and G/C content and was absent when extension at the 3' end was blocked. Nonspecificity and inhibition were decreased or abolished by increasing the annealing temperature and inhibition was decreased by increasing the concentration of polymerase. Primers terminating with G/C produced significantly more nonspecificity and inhibition than primers terminating with A/T. HAT-PCR produced minimal nonspecificity and no inhibition.
conclusionsInhibition of the PCR may result from the presence of genomic DNA and resultant exponential amplification of nonspecific amplicons. Factors contributing to the phenomenon include suboptimal annealing temperature, suboptimal primer design, and suboptimal polymerase concentration. Optimisation of these factors, as in HAT-PCR, enables sensitive quantification of MRD. PCR assays are increasingly used for sensitive detection of other rare targets against a background of genomic DNA and such assays may benefit from similar improvement in PCR design.
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.