Clinical Utility of Droplet Digital PCR for Human Cytomegalovirus

ABSTRACT Human cytomegalovirus (CMV) has historically been the major infectious cause of morbidity and mortality among patients receiving hematopoietic cell or organ transplant. Standard care in a transplant setting involves frequent monitoring of CMV viral load over weeks to months to determine when antiviral treatment may be required. Quantitative PCR (qPCR) is the standard molecular diagnostic method for monitoring. Recently, digital PCR (dPCR) has shown promise in viral diagnostics, although current dPCR systems have lower throughput than qPCR systems. Here, we compare qPCR and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) for CMV detection in patient plasma samples. Droplet digital PCR exhibits increased precision over qPCR at viral loads of ≥4 log10 with equivalent sensitivity. However, retrospective analysis of longitudinal samples from transplant patients with CMV viral loads near therapeutic thresholds did not provide evidence that the improved precision of ddPCR would be of clinical benefit. Given the throughput advantages of current qPCR systems, a widespread switch to dPCR for CMV monitoring would appear premature.

[1]  B. Sandmaier,et al.  Efficacy of a viral load-based, risk-adapted, preemptive treatment strategy for prevention of cytomegalovirus disease after hematopoietic cell transplantation. , 2012, Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

[2]  A. Caliendo,et al.  Virologic suppression measured by a cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA test calibrated to the World Health Organization international standard is predictive of CMV disease resolution in transplant recipients. , 2013, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[3]  Elizabeth McCarthy,et al.  Development and Evaluation of a Next-Generation Digital PCR Diagnostic Assay for Ocular Chlamydia trachomatis Infections , 2013, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[4]  M. Boeckh,et al.  Identification of chromosomally integrated human herpesvirus 6 by droplet digital PCR. , 2014, Clinical chemistry.

[5]  M. Baker Digital PCR hits its stride , 2012, Nature Methods.

[6]  Blaza Toman,et al.  Standard reference material 2366 for measurement of human cytomegalovirus DNA. , 2013, The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD.

[7]  R. Press,et al.  Multi-Site PCR-based CMV viral load assessment-assays demonstrate linearity and precision, but lack numeric standardization: a report of the association for molecular pathology. , 2009, The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD.

[8]  Z. Gu,et al.  Comparison of Droplet Digital PCR to Real-Time PCR for Quantitative Detection of Cytomegalovirus , 2012, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[9]  Douglas D. Richman,et al.  Highly Precise Measurement of HIV DNA by Droplet Digital PCR , 2013, PloS one.

[10]  R. Siliciano,et al.  Comparative Analysis of Measures of Viral Reservoirs in HIV-1 Eradication Studies , 2013, PLoS pathogens.

[11]  V. Carey,et al.  Mixed-Effects Models in S and S-Plus , 2001 .

[12]  L. Cardeñoso,et al.  An International Multicenter Performance Analysis of Cytomegalovirus Load Tests , 2012, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[13]  T. Stevens-Ayers,et al.  Optimization of Quantitative Detection of Cytomegalovirus DNA in Plasma by Real-Time PCR , 2004, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[14]  K. Jerome,et al.  Viral diagnostics in the era of digital polymerase chain reaction. , 2013, Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease.

[15]  Christopher M. Hindson,et al.  Absolute quantification by droplet digital PCR versus analog real-time PCR , 2013, Nature Methods.