BCR-ABL1 molecular detection using quantitative PCR (qPCR) methods is the golden standard of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) monitoring. However, due to variable sensitivity of qPCR assays across laboratories, alternative methods are tested. Digital PCR (dPCR) has been suggested as a robust and reproducible option. Here we present a comparison of droplet dPCR with routinely used reverse-transcription qPCR (RT-qPCR) and automated GeneXpert systems. Detection limit of dPCR was above 3 BCR-ABL1 copies, although due to background amplification the resulting sensitivity was 0.01% BCR-ABL1 (MR4.0). Nevertheless, in comparison with GeneXpert, dPCR categorized more than 50% of the patients into different MR groups, showing a potential for improved BCR-ABL1 detection.
Keywords: BCR-ABL1 monitoring; CML, chronic myeloid leukemia; Chronic myeloid leukemia; Digital PCR; EAC, Europe Against Cancer; FPR, false positivity rate; GeneXpert BCR-ABL Monitor assay; IS, international scale; LOB, limit of blank; LOD, limit of detection; MR, molecular response; NTC, no template control; RT-qPCR; RT-qPCR, reverse-transcription quantitative PCR; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitors; cDNA, complementary DNA; dPCR, digital PCR; pDNA, plasmid DNA; qPCR, quantitative PCR.
© 2021 The Authors.