Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41090772›Full record

ArticleCells2025

Multiplexed Digital PCR Reference Gene Measurement for Genomic and Cell-Free DNA Analysis.

Dilek Yener, Eloise J Busby, Jo Vandesompele, Gertjan Wils, Susan D Richman, Henry M Wood, Jim F Huggett, Carole A Foy, Alison S Devonshire

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cells, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Dilek YenerNational Measurement Laboratory, LGC, Guildford GU2 7XY, UK.ORCID 0009-0009-7080-6126
Eloise J BusbyNational Measurement Laboratory, LGC, Guildford GU2 7XY, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9821-9267
Jo VandesompelePxlence, Building RTP (Entrance 97), UZ Gent Campus, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-6274-0184
Gertjan WilsPxlence, Building RTP (Entrance 97), UZ Gent Campus, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
Susan D RichmanLeeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3993-5041
Henry M WoodLeeds Institute of Medical Research at St James's, University of Leeds, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3009-5904
Jim F HuggettNational Measurement Laboratory, LGC, Guildford GU2 7XY, UK.
Carole A FoyNational Measurement Laboratory, LGC, Guildford GU2 7XY, UK.
Alison S DevonshireNational Measurement Laboratory, LGC, Guildford GU2 7XY, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4960-5468

Funding

DSIT. The research at NML was also funded by the UK government Department for Science, Innovation & Technology (DSIT) through the Chemical & Biological Metrology programme. National Measurement System (NMS)European Partnership on Metrology (ID: 10.13039/100019599). The research at NML and University of Leeds has received funding from the European Partnership on Metrology, co-financed from the European Union's Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Programme 22HLT06 GenomeMETNIHR. SR and HW are supported in part by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Leeds Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) (NIHR203331). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the D NIHR203331
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Precision medicine approaches rely on accurate somatic variant detection, where the DNA input into genomic workflows is a key variable. However, there are no gold standard methods for total DNA quantification. In this study, a pentaplex reference gene panel using digital PCR (dPCR) was developed as a candidate reference method. The multiplex approach was compared between two assay chemistries, applied to healthy donor genomic DNA and plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) to measure the ERBB2 (HER2) copy number variation in cancer cell line DNA. The multiplex approach demonstrated robust performance with the two assay chemistries, demonstrating comparable results and a wide dynamic range. Ratios of reference genes were close to the expected 1:1 in healthy samples; however, some small but significant differences (<1.2-fold) were observed in one of the five targets. Expanded relative measurement uncertainty was 12.1-19.8% for healthy gDNA and 9.2-25.2% for cfDNA. The multiplex approach afforded lower measurement uncertainty compared to the use of a single reference for total DNA quantification, which is an advantage for its potential use as a calibration method. It avoided potential biases in the application to CNV quantification of cancer samples, where cancer genome instability may be prominent.

Indexed as

Cell-Free Nucleic AcidsGenomicsMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionCell Line, TumorDNA Copy Number VariationsErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesHumansReference StandardsCell-Free Nucleic AcidsErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesdPCRgenome equivalentsliquid biopsyprecision medicinereference gene stability

Identifiers

PMID41090772
PMCPMC12523864

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.