ArticleCell biochemistry and function2025
Comparative Analysis of Two Digital PCR Platforms for Detecting DNA Methylation in Patient Samples.
Article in Cell biochemistry and function, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The choice of appropriate analytical methods for determining methylation patterns at specific loci across the genome is essential for identifying novel diagnostic and prognostic markers for subsequent clinical implementation. Various methods exist for determining methylation status using different technologies. In this study, we compared two distinct digital polymerase chain reaction (PCR) platforms: the nanoplate-based Qiagen QIAcuity Digital PCR (dPCR) System and the droplet-based Bio-Rad QX-200 Droplet Digital PCR (ddPCR) System. By assessing their efficacy and other attributes, we aimed to elucidate each platform's strengths and limitations in the sensitive detection of DNA methylation, thus contributing valuable insights to the field of molecular diagnostics. We analyzed the methylation status of the CDH13 gene in 141 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded breast cancer tissue samples using our in-house developed methylation-specific labeled assay. The specificity and sensitivity of the CDH13 assay evaluated by dPCR were 99.62% and 99.08%, respectively; ddPCR analysis reached a specificity of 100% and a sensitivity of 98.03%. In addition, our data revealed a strong correlation between the methylation levels measured by both methods (r = 0.954). Although both methods are based on different technologies, they yielded comparable, highly sensitive experimental data in our study. Consequently, the main criteria for selecting an optimal digital PCR platform for methylation analysis may lie in other factors such as workflow time and complexity, instrument requirements, the possibility of temperature gradient, reanalysis, or offline options.
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.