A standardised methodology for the extraction and quantification of cell-free DNA in cerebrospinal fluid and application to evaluation of Alzheimer's disease and brain cancers.

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is a source of diagnostic biomarkers for a range of neurological conditions. Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is detected in CSF and differences in the concentration of cell-free mitochondrial DNA have been reported in studies of neurodegenerative disorders including Alzheimer's disease (AD). However, the influence of pre-analytical steps has not been investigated for cfDNA in CSF and there is no standardised approach for quantification of total cfDNA (copies of nuclear genome or mitochondria-derived gene targets). In this study, the suitability of four extraction methods was evaluated: QIAamp Circulating Nucleic Acid (Qiagen), Quick-cfDNA Serum & Plasma (Zymo), NucleoSnap® DNA Plasma (Macherey-Nagel) and Plasma/Serum Circulating DNA Purification Mini (Norgen) kits, for cfDNA extraction from CSF of controls and AD dementia patients, utilising a spike-in control for extraction efficiency and fragment size. One of the optimal extraction methods was applied to a comparison of cfDNA concentrations in CSF from control subjects, AD dementia and primary and secondary brain tumour patients. Extraction efficiency based on spike-in recovery was similar in all three groups whilst both endogenous mitochondrial and nucleus-derived cfDNA was significantly higher in CSF from cancer patients compared to control and AD groups, which typically contained < 100 genome copies/mL. This study shows that it is feasible to measure low concentration nuclear and mitochondrial gene targets in CSF and that normalisation of extraction yield can help control pre-analytical variability influencing biomarker measurements.

Applicability of Control Materials To Support Gene Promoter Characterization and Expression in Engineered Cells Using Digital PCR.

The use of standardized components and processes in engineering underpins the design-build-test model, and the engineering of biological systems is no different. Substantial efforts to standardize both the components and the methods to validate the engineered biological systems is ongoing. This study has developed a panel of control materials encoding the commonly used reporter genes GFP and RFP as DNA or RNA molecules. Each panel contained up to six samples with increasingly small copy number differences between the two reporter genes that ranged from 1- to 2-fold differences. These copy number differences represent the magnitude of changes that may need to be measured to validate an engineered system. Using digital PCR (dPCR), we demonstrated that it is possible to quantify changes in both gene and gene transcript numbers both within and between samples down to 1.05-fold. We corroborated these findings using a simple gene circuit within a bacterial model to demonstrate that dPCR was able to precisely identify small changes in gene expression of two transcripts in response to promoter stimulation. Finally, we used our findings to highlight sources of error that can contributed to the measurement uncertainty in the measurement of small ratios in biological systems. Together, the development of a panel of control materials and validation of a high accuracy method for the measurement of small changes in gene expression, this study can contribute to the engineering biology "toolkit" of methods and materials to support the current standardization efforts.

The performance of human cytomegalovirus digital PCR reference measurement procedure in seven external quality assessment schemes over four years.

A candidate digital PCR (dPCR)-based reference measurement procedure for quantification of human cytomegalovirus (hCMV) was evaluated in 10 viral load comparison schemes (seven external quality assessment (EQA) and three additional training schemes) organized by INSTAND e.V. over four years (between September 2014 and March 2018). Four metrology institutes participated in these schemes using the same extraction method and dPCR measurement procedure for the hCMV specific target sequence of UL54 gene. The calibration independent reference measurement procedure results from the metrology institutes were compared to the results of the clinical diagnostic laboratories applying hCMV qPCR measurement procedures calibrated to reference materials. While the criteria for the acceptable deviation from the target value interval for INSTAND's EQA schemes is from -0.8 log10 to +0.8 log10, the majority of dPCR results were between -0.2 log10 to +0.2 log10. Only 4 out of 45 results exceeded this interval with the maximum deviation of -0.542 log10. In the training schemes containing samples with lower hCMV concentrations, more than half of the results deviated less than ±0.2 log10 from the target value, while more than 95% deviated less than ±0.4 log10 from the target value. Evaluation of intra- and inter-laboratory variation of dPCR results confirmed high reproducibility and trueness of the method. This work demonstrates that dPCR has the potential to act as a calibration independent reference measurement procedure for the value assignment of hCMV calibration and reference materials to support qPCR calibration as well as ultimately for routine hCMV load testing.

The Dangers of Using Cq to Quantify Nucleic Acid in Biological Samples: A Lesson From COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA quantities, measured by reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR), have been proposed to stratify clinical risk or determine analytical performance targets. We investigated reproducibility and how setting diagnostic cutoffs altered the clinical sensitivity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) testing. METHODS: Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 RNA distributions [quantification cycle (Cq) and copies/mL] from more than 6000 patients from 3 clinical laboratories in United Kingdom, Belgium, and the Republic of Korea were analyzed. Impact of Cq cutoffs on clinical sensitivity was assessed. The June/July 2020 INSTAND external quality assessment scheme SARS-CoV-2 materials were used to estimate laboratory reported copies/mL and to estimate the variation in copies/mL for a given Cq. RESULTS: When the WHO-suggested Cq cutoff of 25 was applied, the clinical sensitivity dropped to about 16%. Clinical sensitivity also dropped to about 27% when a simulated limit of detection of 106 copies/mL was applied. The interlaboratory variation for a given Cq value was >1000 fold in copies/mL (99% CI). CONCLUSION: While RT-qPCR has been instrumental in the response to COVID-19, we recommend Cq (cycle threshold or crossing point) values not be used to set clinical cutoffs or diagnostic performance targets due to poor interlaboratory reproducibility; calibrated copy-based units (used elsewhere in virology) offer more reproducible alternatives. We also report a phenomenon where diagnostic performance may change relative to the effective reproduction number. Our findings indicate that the disparities between patient populations across time are an important consideration when evaluating or deploying diagnostic tests. This is especially relevant to the emergency situation of an evolving pandemic.

Assessment of Digital PCR as a Primary Reference Measurement Procedure to Support Advances in Precision Medicine.

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.

Development of a highly sensitive liquid biopsy platform to detect clinically-relevant cancer mutations at low allele fractions in cell-free DNA.

INTRODUCTION: Detection and monitoring of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is rapidly becoming a diagnostic, prognostic and predictive tool in cancer patient care. A growing number of gene targets have been identified as diagnostic or actionable, requiring the development of reliable technology that provides analysis of multiple genes in parallel. We have developed the InVision™ liquid biopsy platform which utilizes enhanced TAm-Seq™ (eTAm-Seq™) technology, an amplicon-based next generation sequencing method for the identification of clinically-relevant somatic alterations at low frequency in ctDNA across a panel of 35 cancer-related genes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We present analytical validation of the eTAm-Seq technology across two laboratories to determine the reproducibility of mutation identification. We assess the quantitative performance of eTAm-Seq technology for analysis of single nucleotide variants in clinically-relevant genes as compared to digital PCR (dPCR), using both established DNA standards and novel full-process control material. RESULTS: The assay detected mutant alleles down to 0.02% AF, with high per-base specificity of 99.9997%. Across two laboratories, analysis of samples with optimal amount of DNA detected 94% mutations at 0.25%-0.33% allele fraction (AF), with 90% of mutations detected for samples with lower amounts of input DNA. CONCLUSIONS: These studies demonstrate that eTAm-Seq technology is a robust and reproducible technology for the identification and quantification of somatic mutations in circulating tumor DNA, and support its use in clinical applications for precision medicine.

Instability of 8E5 calibration standard revealed by digital PCR risks inaccurate quantification of HIV DNA in clinical samples by qPCR.

ABTRACT: Establishing a cure for HIV is hindered by the persistence of latently infected cells which constitute the viral reservoir. Real-time qPCR, used for quantification of this reservoir by measuring HIV DNA, requires external calibration; a common choice of calibrator is the 8E5 cell line, which is assumed to be stable and to contain one HIV provirus per cell. In contrast, digital PCR requires no external calibration and potentially provides 'absolute' quantification. We compared the performance of qPCR and dPCR in quantifying HIV DNA in 18 patient samples. HIV DNA was detected in 18 by qPCR and in 15 by dPCR, the difference being due to the smaller sample volume analysed by dPCR. There was good quantitative correlation (R2 = 0.86) between the techniques but on average dPCR values were only 60% of qPCR values. Surprisingly, investigation revealed that this discrepancy was due to loss of HIV DNA from the 8E5 cell calibrant. 8E5 extracts from two other sources were also shown to have significantly less than one HIV DNA copy per cell and progressive loss of HIV from 8E5 cells during culture was demonstrated. We therefore suggest that the copy number of HIV in 8E5 extracts be established by dPCR prior to use as calibrator.

Inter-laboratory assessment of different digital PCR platforms for quantification of human cytomegalovirus DNA.

Quantitative PCR (qPCR) is an important tool in pathogen detection. However, the use of different qPCR components, calibration materials and DNA extraction methods reduces comparability between laboratories, which can result in false diagnosis and discrepancies in patient care. The wider establishment of a metrological framework for nucleic acid tests could improve the degree of standardisation of pathogen detection and the quantification methods applied in the clinical context. To achieve this, accurate methods need to be developed and implemented as reference measurement procedures, and to facilitate characterisation of suitable certified reference materials. Digital PCR (dPCR) has already been used for pathogen quantification by analysing nucleic acids. Although dPCR has the potential to provide robust and accurate quantification of nucleic acids, further assessment of its actual performance characteristics is needed before it can be implemented in a metrological framework, and to allow adequate estimation of measurement uncertainties. Here, four laboratories demonstrated reproducibility (expanded measurement uncertainties below 15%) of dPCR for quantification of DNA from human cytomegalovirus, with no calibration to a common reference material. Using whole-virus material and extracted DNA, an intermediate precision (coefficients of variation below 25%) between three consecutive experiments was noted. Furthermore, discrepancies in estimated mean DNA copy number concentrations between laboratories were less than twofold, with DNA extraction as the main source of variability. These data demonstrate that dPCR offers a repeatable and reproducible method for quantification of viral DNA, and due to its satisfactory performance should be considered as candidate for reference methods for implementation in a metrological framework.

International Interlaboratory Digital PCR Study Demonstrating High Reproducibility for the Measurement of a Rare Sequence Variant.

This study tested the claim that digital PCR (dPCR) can offer highly reproducible quantitative measurements in disparate laboratories. Twenty-one laboratories measured four blinded samples containing different quantities of a KRAS fragment encoding G12D, an important genetic marker for guiding therapy of certain cancers. This marker is challenging to quantify reproducibly using quantitative PCR (qPCR) or next generation sequencing (NGS) due to the presence of competing wild type sequences and the need for calibration. Using dPCR, 18 laboratories were able to quantify the G12D marker within 12% of each other in all samples. Three laboratories appeared to measure consistently outlying results; however, proper application of a follow-up analysis recommendation rectified their data. Our findings show that dPCR has demonstrable reproducibility across a large number of laboratories without calibration. This could enable the reproducible application of molecular stratification to guide therapy and, potentially, for molecular diagnostics.

The use of digital PCR to improve the application of quantitative molecular diagnostic methods for tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: Real-time PCR (qPCR) based methods, such as the Xpert MTB/RIF, are increasingly being used to diagnose tuberculosis (TB). While qualitative methods are adequate for diagnosis, the therapeutic monitoring of TB patients requires quantitative methods currently performed using smear microscopy. The potential use of quantitative molecular measurements for therapeutic monitoring has been investigated but findings have been variable and inconclusive. The lack of an adequate reference method and reference materials is a barrier to understanding the source of such disagreement. Digital PCR (dPCR) offers the potential for an accurate method for quantification of specific DNA sequences in reference materials which can be used to evaluate quantitative molecular methods for TB treatment monitoring. METHODS: To assess a novel approach for the development of quality assurance materials we used dPCR to quantify specific DNA sequences in a range of prototype reference materials and evaluated accuracy between different laboratories and instruments. The materials were then also used to evaluate the quantitative performance of qPCR and Xpert MTB/RIF in eight clinical testing laboratories. RESULTS: dPCR was found to provide results in good agreement with the other methods tested and to be highly reproducible between laboratories without calibration even when using different instruments. When the reference materials were analysed with qPCR and Xpert MTB/RIF by clinical laboratories, all laboratories were able to correctly rank the reference materials according to concentration, however there was a marked difference in the measured magnitude. CONCLUSIONS: TB is a disease where the quantification of the pathogen could lead to better patient management and qPCR methods offer the potential to rapidly perform such analysis. However, our findings suggest that when precisely characterised materials are used to evaluate qPCR methods, the measurement result variation is too high to determine whether molecular quantification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis would provide a clinically useful readout. The methods described in this study provide a means by which the technical performance of quantitative molecular methods can be evaluated independently of clinical variability to improve accuracy of measurement results. These will assist in ultimately increasing the likelihood that such approaches could be used to improve patient management of TB.

An international comparability study on quantification of mRNA gene expression ratios: CCQM-P103.1.

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.

Detection of Rare Drug Resistance Mutations by Digital PCR in a Human Influenza A Virus Model System and Clinical Samples.

Digital PCR (dPCR) is being increasingly used for the quantification of sequence variations, including single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), due to its high accuracy and precision in comparison with techniques such as quantitative PCR (qPCR) and melt curve analysis. To develop and evaluate dPCR for SNP detection using DNA, RNA, and clinical samples, an influenza virus model of resistance to oseltamivir (Tamiflu) was used. First, this study was able to recognize and reduce off-target amplification in dPCR quantification, thereby enabling technical sensitivities down to 0.1% SNP abundance at a range of template concentrations, a 50-fold improvement on the qPCR assay used routinely in the clinic. Second, a method was developed for determining the false-positive rate (background) signal. Finally, comparison of dPCR with qPCR results on clinical samples demonstrated the potential impact dPCR could have on clinical research and patient management by earlier (trace) detection of rare drug-resistant sequence variants. Ultimately this could reduce the quantity of ineffective drugs taken and facilitate early switching to alternative medication when available. In the short term such methods could advance our understanding of microbial dynamics and therapeutic responses in a range of infectious diseases such as HIV, viral hepatitis, and tuberculosis. Furthermore, the findings presented here are directly relevant to other diagnostic areas, such as the detection of rare SNPs in malignancy, monitoring of graft rejection, and fetal screening.

Highly reproducible absolute quantification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex by digital PCR.

Digital PCR (dPCR) offers absolute quantification through the limiting dilution of template nucleic acid molecules and has the potential to offer high reproducibility. However, the robustness of dPCR has yet to be evaluated using complex genomes to compare different dPCR methods and platforms. We used DNA templates from the pathogen Mycobacterium tuberculosis to evaluate the impact of template type, master mixes, primer pairs and, crucially, extraction methods on dPCR performance. Performance was compared between the chip (BioMark) and droplet (QX100) formats. In the absence of any external calibration, dPCR measurements were generally consistent within ∼2-fold between different master mixes and primers. Template DNA integrity could influence dPCR performance: high molecular weight gDNA resulted in underperformance of one master mix, while restriction digestion of a low molecular weight sample also caused underestimation. Good concordance (≤1.5-fold difference) was observed between chip and droplet formats. Platform precision was in agreement with predicted Poisson error based on partition number, but this was a minor component (<10%) of the total variance when extraction was included. dPCR offers a robust reproducible method for DNA measurement; however, as a predominant source of error, the process of DNA extraction will need to be controlled with suitable calibrators to maximize agreement between laboratories.

Considerations for digital PCR as an accurate molecular diagnostic tool.

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.

Standardization of Nucleic Acid Tests for Clinical Measurements of Bacteria and Viruses.

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 standardization of quantitative viral load testing are discussed in relation to human cytomegalovirus, BK virus, and Epstein-Barr virus, while the importance of defining the performance of qualitative methods is illustrated with Mycobacterium tuberculosis and influenza virus. The development of certified reference materials whose 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.

Quantification of epigenetic biomarkers: an evaluation of established and emerging methods for DNA methylation analysis.

BACKGROUND: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Assessing the accuracy of quantitative molecular microbial profiling.

The application of high-throughput sequencing in profiling microbial communities is providing an unprecedented ability to investigate microbiomes. Such studies typically apply one of two methods: amplicon sequencing using PCR to target a conserved orthologous sequence (typically the 16S ribosomal RNA gene) or whole (meta)genome sequencing (WGS). Both methods have been used to catalog the microbial taxa present in a sample and quantify their respective abundances. However, a comparison of the inherent precision or bias of the different sequencing approaches has not been performed. We previously developed a metagenomic control material (MCM) to investigate error when performing different sequencing strategies. Amplicon sequencing using four different primer strategies and two 16S rRNA regions was examined (Roche 454 Junior) and compared to WGS (Illumina HiSeq). All sequencing methods generally performed comparably and in good agreement with organism specific digital PCR (dPCR); WGS notably demonstrated very high precision. Where discrepancies between relative abundances occurred they tended to differ by less than twofold. Our findings suggest that when alternative sequencing approaches are used for microbial molecular profiling they can perform with good reproducibility, but care should be taken when comparing small differences between distinct methods. This work provides a foundation for future work comparing relative differences between samples and the impact of extraction methods. We also highlight the value of control materials when conducting microbial profiling studies to benchmark methods and set appropriate thresholds.

Considerations for accurate gene expression measurement by reverse transcription quantitative PCR when analysing clinical samples.

Reverse transcription quantitative PCR is an established, simple and effective method for RNA measurement. However, technical standardisation challenges combined with frequent insufficient experimental detail render replication of many published findings challenging. Consequently, without adequate consideration of experimental standardisation, such findings may be sufficient for a given publication but cannot be translated to wider clinical application. This article builds on earlier standardisation work and the MIQE guidelines, discussing processes that need consideration for accurate, reproducible analysis when dealing with patient samples. By applying considerations common to the science of measurement (metrology), one can maximise the impact of gene expression studies, increasing the likelihood of their translation to clinical tools.

Towards standardisation of cell-free DNA measurement in plasma: controls for extraction efficiency, fragment size bias and quantification.

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.