Presence of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in food and feed products is regulated in many countries. The European Union (EU) has implemented a threshold for labeling of products containing more than 0.9% of authorized GMOs per ingredient. As the number of GMOs has increased over time, standard-curve based simplex quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) analyses are no longer sufficiently cost-effective, despite widespread use of initial PCR based screenings. Newly developed GMO detection methods, also multiplex methods, are mostly focused on screening and detection but not quantification. On the basis of droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) technology, multiplex assays for quantification of all 12 EU authorized GM maize lines (per April first 2015) were developed. Because of high sequence similarity of some of the 12 GM targets, two separate multiplex assays were needed. In both assays (4-plex and 10-plex), the transgenes were labeled with one fluorescence reporter and the endogene with another (GMO concentration = transgene/endogene ratio). It was shown that both multiplex assays produce specific results and that performance parameters such as limit of quantification, repeatability, and trueness comply with international recommendations for GMO quantification methods. Moreover, for samples containing GMOs, the throughput and cost-effectiveness is significantly improved compared to qPCR. Thus, it was concluded that the multiplex ddPCR assays could be applied for routine quantification of 12 EU authorized GM maize lines. In case of new authorizations, the events can easily be added to the existing multiplex assays. The presented principle of quantitative multiplexing can be applied to any other domain.

Accurate and precise nucleic-acid quantification is crucial for clinical and diagnostic decisions, as overestimation or underestimation can lead to misguided treatment of a disease or incorrect labelling of the products. Digital PCR is one of the best tools for absolute nucleic-acid copy-number determination. However, digital PCR needs to be well characterised in terms of accuracy and sources of uncertainty. With droplet digital PCR, discrepancies between the droplet volume assigned by the manufacturer and measured by independent laboratories have already been shown in previous studies. In the present study, we report on the results of an inter-laboratory comparison of different methods for droplet volume determination that is based on optical microscopy imaging and is traceable to the International System of Units. This comparison was conducted on the same DNA material, with the examination of the influence of parameters such as droplet generators, supermixes, operators, inter-cartridge and intra-cartridge variability, and droplet measuring protocol. The mean droplet volume was measured using a QX200™ AutoDG™ Droplet Digital™ PCR system and two QX100™ Droplet Digital™ PCR systems. The data show significant volume differences between these two systems, as well as significant differences in volume when different supermixes are used. We also show that both of these droplet generator systems produce droplets with significantly lower droplet volumes (13.1%, 15.9%, respectively) than stated by the manufacturer and previously measured by other laboratories. This indicates that to ensure precise quantification, the droplet volumes should be assessed for each system.

The increased use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is accompanied by increased complexity of the matrices that contain GMOs. The most common DNA-based approach for GMO detection and quantification is real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). However, as qPCR is sensitive to inhibitors and relies on standard curves for quantification, it has limited application in GMO quantification for complex matrices. To overcome this hurdle in DNA quantification, we present droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) assays that were designed to target 'Roundup Ready' soybean and the soybean reference gene. Three ddPCR assays were transferred from qPCR to QX100/QX200 ddPCR platforms and characterised. Together, the fitness-for-purpose study on four real-life samples and the use of a chamber-based PCR system, showed that dPCR has great potential to improve such measurements in GMO testing and monitoring of food authenticity.

Quantification of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food and feed products is often required for their labelling or for tolerance thresholds. Standard-curve-based simplex quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) is the prevailing technology, which is often combined with screening analysis. With the rapidly growing number of GMOs on the world market, qPCR analysis becomes laborious and expensive. Innovative cost-effective approaches are therefore urgently needed. Here, we report the development and inter-laboratory assessment of multiplex assays to quantify GMO soybean using droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). The assays were developed to facilitate testing of foods and feed for compliance with current GMO regulations in the European Union (EU). Within the EU, the threshold for labelling is 0.9% for authorised GMOs per ingredient. Furthermore, the EU has set a technical zero tolerance limit of 0.1% for certain unauthorised GMOs. The novel multiplex ddPCR assays developed target 11 GMO soybean lines that are currently authorised, and four that are tolerated, pending authorisation in the EU. Potential significant improvements in cost efficiency are demonstrated. Performance was assessed for the critical parameters, including limits of detection and quantification, and trueness, repeatability, and robustness. Inter-laboratory performance was also determined on a number of proficiency programme and real-life samples.

Detection and quantification of DNA biomarkers relies heavily on the yield and quality of DNA obtained by extraction from different matrices. Although a large number of studies have compared the yields of different extraction methods, the repeatability and intermediate precision of these methods have been largely overlooked. In the present study, five extraction methods were evaluated, using digital PCR, to determine their efficiency in extracting DNA from three different Gram-negative bacteria in sputum samples. The performance of two automated methods (GXT NA and QuickPick genomic DNA extraction kit, using Arrow and KingFisher Duo automated systems, respectively), two manual kit-based methods (QIAamp DNA mini kit; DNeasy UltraClean microbial kit), and one manual non-kit method (CTAB), was assessed. While GXT NA extraction kit and the CTAB method have the highest DNA yield, they did not meet the strict criteria for repeatability, intermediate precision, and measurement uncertainty for all three studied bacteria. However, due to limited clinical samples, a compromise is necessary, and the GXT NA extraction kit was found to be the method of choice. The study also showed that dPCR allowed for accurate determination of extraction method repeatability, which can help standardize molecular diagnostic approaches. Additionally, the determination of absolute copy numbers facilitated the calculation of measurement uncertainty, which was found to be influenced by the DNA extraction method used.