Circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is becoming an important clinical analyte for prenatal testing, cancer diagnosis and cancer monitoring. The extraction stage is critical in ensuring clinical sensitivity of analytical methods measuring minority nucleic acid fractions, such as foetal-derived sequences in predominantly maternal cfDNA. Consequently, quality controls are required for measurement of extraction efficiency, fragment size bias and yield for validation of cfDNA methods. We evaluated the utility of an external DNA spike for monitoring these parameters in a study comparing three specific cfDNA extraction methods [QIAamp® circulating nucleic acid (CNA) kit, NucleoSpin® Plasma XS (NS) kit and FitAmp™ plasma/serum DNA isolation (FA) kit] with the commonly used QIAamp DNA blood mini (DBM) kit. We found that the extraction efficiencies of the kits ranked in the order CNA kit > DBM kit > NS kit > FA kit, and the CNA and NS kits gave a better representation of smaller DNA fragments in the extract than the DBM kit. We investigated means of improved reporting of cfDNA yield by comparing quantitative PCR measurements of seven different reference gene assays in plasma samples and validating these with digital PCR. We noted that the cfDNA quantities based on measurement of some target genes (e.g. TERT) were, on average, more than twofold higher than those of other assays (e.g. ERV3). We conclude that analysis and averaging of multiple reference genes using a GeNorm approach gives a more reliable estimate of total cfDNA quantity. Comparison of single and multiple reference gene normalisation for quantification of plasma cell free DNA

Background: Genetic testing of tumor tissue and circulating cell-free DNA for somatic variants guides patient treatment of many cancers. Such measurements will be fundamental in the future support of precision medicine. However, there are currently no primary reference measurement procedures available for nucleic acid quantification that would support translation of tests for circulating tumor DNA into routine use. Methods: We assessed the accuracy of digital PCR (dPCR) for copy number quantification of a frequently occurring single-nucleotide variant in colorectal cancer (KRAS c.35G>A, p.Gly12Asp, from hereon termed G12D) by evaluating potential sources of uncertainty that influence dPCR measurement. Results: Concentration values for samples of KRAS G12D and wild-type plasmid templates varied by <1.2-fold when measured using 5 different assays with varying detection chemistry (hydrolysis, scorpion probes, and intercalating dyes) and <1.3-fold with 4 commercial dPCR platforms. Measurement trueness of a selected dPCR assay and platform was validated by comparison with an orthogonal method (inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry). The candidate dPCR reference measurement procedure showed linear quantification over a wide range of copies per reaction and high repeatability and interlaboratory reproducibility (CV, 2%–8% and 5%–10%, respectively). Conclusions: This work validates dPCR as an SI-traceable reference measurement procedure based on enumeration and demonstrates how it can be applied for assignment of copy number concentration and fractional abundance values to DNA reference materials in an aqueous solution. High-accuracy measurements using dPCR will support the implementation and traceable standardization of molecular diagnostic procedures needed for advancements in precision medicine.

DNA methylation is an important epigenetic mechanism in several human diseases, most notably cancer. The quantitative analysis of DNA methylation patterns has the potential to serve as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, however, there is currently a lack of consensus regarding the optimal methodologies to quantify methylation status. To address this issue we compared five analytical methods: (i) MethyLight qPCR, (ii) MethyLight digital PCR (dPCR), methylation-sensitive and -dependent restriction enzyme (MSRE/MDRE) digestion followed by (iii) qPCR or (iv) dPCR, and (v) bisulfite amplicon next generation sequencing (NGS). The techniques were evaluated for linearity, accuracy and precision. MethyLight qPCR displayed the best linearity across the range of tested samples. Observed methylation measured by MethyLight- and MSRE/MDRE-qPCR and -dPCR were not significantly different to expected values whilst bisulfite amplicon NGS analysis over-estimated methylation content. Bisulfite amplicon NGS showed good precision, whilst the lower precision of qPCR and dPCR analysis precluded discrimination of differences of < 25% in methylation status. A novel dPCR MethyLight assay is also described as a potential method for absolute quantification that simultaneously measures both sense and antisense DNA strands following bisulfite treatment. Our findings comprise a comprehensive benchmark for the quantitative accuracy of key methods for methylation analysis and demonstrate their applicability to the quantification of circulating tumour DNA biomarkers by using sample concentrations that are representative of typical clinical isolates.

Nucleic acid based tests for infectious diseases currently used in the clinical laboratory and in point of care devices are diverse. Measurement challenges associated with standardisation of quantitative viral load testing are discussed in relation to human cytomegalovirus, BK and Epstein Barr virus, whilst the importance of defining the performance of qualitative methods is illustrated with Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Influenza virus. The development of certified reference materials of which values are traceable to higher order standards and reference measurement procedures, using for instance digital PCR, will further contribute to the understanding of analytical performance characteristics and promote clinical data comparability.

Measurement of RNA can be used to study and monitor a range of infectious and non-communicable diseases, with profiling of multiple gene expression mRNA transcripts being increasingly applied to cancer stratification and prognosis. An international comparison study (Consultative Committee for Amount of Substance (CCQM)-P103.1) was performed in order to evaluate the comparability of measurements of RNA copy number ratio for multiple gene targets between two samples. Six exogenous synthetic targets comprising of External RNA Control Consortium (ERCC) standards were measured alongside transcripts for three endogenous gene targets present in the background of human cell line RNA. The study was carried out under the auspices of the Nucleic Acids (formerly Bioanalysis) Working Group of the CCQM. It was coordinated by LGC (United Kingdom) with the support of National Institute of Standards and Technology (USA) and results were submitted from thirteen National Metrology Institutes and Designated Institutes. The majority of laboratories performed RNA measurements using RT-qPCR, with datasets also being submitted by two laboratories based on reverse transcription digital polymerase chain reaction and one laboratory using a next-generation sequencing method. In RT-qPCR analysis, the RNA copy number ratios between the two samples were quantified using either a standard curve or a relative quantification approach. In general, good agreement was observed between the reported results of ERCC RNA copy number ratio measurements. Measurements of the RNA copy number ratios for endogenous genes between the two samples were also consistent between the majority of laboratories. Some differences in the reported values and confidence intervals ('measurement uncertainties') were noted which may be attributable to choice of measurement method or quantification approach. This highlights the need for standardised practices for the calculation of fold change ratios and uncertainties in the area of gene expression profiling.

Background: Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) assist in the diagnosis of numerous infectious diseases. They are typically sensitive and specific and can be quickly developed and adapted. Far more challenging is the development of standards to ensure NAATs are performing within specification; reference materials take time to develop and suitable reference measurement procedures (RMPs) have not been available. This study investigated digital PCR (dPCR) RMP delivery of traceability for NAAT external quality assessment (EQA). Methods: Three National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) applied reverse transcription (RT)-dPCR as a candidate RMP to estimate the RNA quantity in 32 independent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 materials. The results were combined to value assign the respective materials: 21 materials were used in 6 rounds of EQA over 17 months for 61 laboratories for COVID-19 testing results compared with reference values. Results: The agreement between the 3 NMIs showed <2-fold difference between laboratories. EQA laboratory reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) values estimation of viral RNA quantity showed good median agreement with RT-dPCR reference value; however, RT-qPCR differences were generally between 10- and 50-fold between laboratories. Conclusion: This work demonstrates how RT-dPCR can provide reference values for whole virus materials for NAAT quality assurance. RT-dPCR values guided EQA control material selection and provided EQA participants with traceability to RNA copy number delivered through the RMP. This approach can be used to support routine reference material use as well as to standardize quality assurance for NAATs where established reference materials are not available, such as in disease outbreaks.