The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Considerations for Digital PCR as an Accurate Molecular Diagnostic Tool
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Digital PCR (dPCR) is an increasingly popular manifestation of PCR that offers a number of unique advantages when applied to preclinical research, particularly when used to detect rare mutations and in the precise quantification of nucleic acids. As is common with many new research methods, the application of dPCR to potential clinical scenarios is also being increasingly described. CONTENT: This review addresses some of the factors that need to be considered in the application of dPCR. Compared to real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR), dPCR clearly has the potential to offer more sensitive and considerably more reproducible clinical methods that could lend themselves to diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive tests. But for this to be realized the technology will need to be further developed to reduce cost and simplify application. Concomitantly the preclinical research will need be reported with a comprehensive understanding of the associated errors. dPCR benefits from a far more predictable variance than qPCR but is as susceptible to upstream errors associated with factors like sampling and extraction. dPCR can also suffer systematic bias, particularly leading to underestimation, and internal positive controls are likely to be as important for dPCR as they are for qPCR, especially when reporting the absence of a sequence. SUMMARY: In this review we highlight some of the considerations that may be needed when applying dPCR and discuss sources of error. The factors discussed here aim to assist in the translation of dPCR to diagnostic, predictive, or prognostic applications.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Vogelstein, B., & Kinzler, K. W. (1999) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.96.16.9236 · Cited by 1,770
Simultaneous Amplification and Detection of Specific DNA Sequences
Higuchi, R., Dollinger, G., Walsh, P. S., & Griffith, R. (1992) · Bio/Technology · doi:10.1038/nbt0492-413 · Cited by 1,130
Evaluation of a Droplet Digital Polymerase Chain Reaction Format for DNA Copy Number Quantification
Pinheiro, L. B., Coleman, V. A., Hindson, C. M., Herrmann, J., Hindson, B. J., Bhat, S., & Emslie, K. R. (2012) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/ac202578x · Cited by 1,055
Huggett, J. F., Foy, C. A., Benes, V., Emslie, K., Garson, J. A., Haynes, R., Hellemans, J., Kubista, M., Mueller, R. D., Nolan, T., et al. (2013) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1373/clinchem.2013.206375 · Cited by 859
Self-citationERBB2 amplification in breast cancer analyzed by fluorescence in situ hybridization
Kallioniemi, O. P., Kallioniemi, A., Kurisu, W., Thor, A., Chen, L. C., Smith, H. S., Waldman, F. M., Pinkel, D., & Gray, J. W. (1992) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.89.12.5321 · Cited by 555
Highly Precise Measurement of HIV DNA by Droplet Digital PCR
Strain, M. C., Lada, S. M., Luong, T., Rought, S. E., Gianella, S., Terry, V. H., Spina, C. A., Woelk, C. H., & Richman, D. D. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0055943 · Cited by 504
Taly, V., Pekin, D., Benhaim, L., Kotsopoulos, S. K., Le Corre, D., Li, X., Atochin, I., Link, D. R., Griffiths, A. D., Pallier, K., et al. (2013) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1373/clinchem.2013.206359 · Cited by 492
Whale, A. S., Huggett, J. F., Cowen, S., Speirs, V., Shaw, J., Ellison, S., Foy, C. A., & Scott, D. J. (2012) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gks203 · Cited by 453
Self-citationDigital PCR for the molecular detection of fetal chromosomal aneuploidy
Lo, Y. M. D., Lun, F. M. F., Chan, K. C. A., Tsui, N. B. Y., Chong, K. C., Lau, T. K., Leung, T. Y., Zee, B. C. Y., Cantor, C. R., & Chiu, R. W. K. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0705765104 · Cited by 434
Standardized definitions of molecular response in chronic myeloid leukemia
Cross, N. C. P., White, H. E., Müller, M. C., Saglio, G., & Hochhaus, A. (2012) · Leukemia · doi:10.1038/leu.2012.104 · Cited by 378
Cited by
Quan, P.-L., Sauzade, M., & Brouzes, E. (2018) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s18041271 · Cited by 664
Recent Advances in Droplet Microfluidics
Ding, Y., Howes, P. D., & deMello, A. J. (2020) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.9b05047 · Cited by 357
Digital Assays Part I: Partitioning Statistics and Digital PCR
Basu, A. S. (2017) · SLAS Technology · doi:10.1177/2472630317705680 · Cited by 300
Li, T., Shao, Y., Fu, L., Xie, Y., Zhu, L., Sun, W., Yu, R., Xiao, B., & Guo, J. (2018) · Journal of Molecular Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00109-017-1600-y · Cited by 266
Detection and Identification of Genome Editing in Plants: Challenges and Opportunities
Grohmann, L., Keilwagen, J., Duensing, N., Dagand, E., Hartung, F., Wilhelm, R., Bendiek, J., & Sprink, T. (2019) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2019.00236 · Cited by 135
Metadata
- Authors
- Huggett, J. F., Cowen, S., & Foy, C. A.
- Venue
- Clinical Chemistry
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2015-01-01
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 79-88
- ISSN
- 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8561
- OpenAlex
- W2078148381
- Cited by
- 444
- References
- 46
- FWCI
- 15.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Considerations for Digital PCR as an Accurate Molecular Diagnostic Tool. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1373/clinchem.2014.221366
- The paper
- Huggett, J. F., Cowen, S., & Foy, C. A. (2015). Considerations for Digital PCR as an Accurate Molecular Diagnostic Tool. Clinical Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2014.221366
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
