4.6 Article

Digital Droplet PCR for the Absolute Quantification of Exon Skipping Induced by Antisense Oligonucleotides in (Pre-)Clinical Development for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 11, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0162467

关键词

-

资金

  1. BioMarin Nederland BV, Leiden, The Netherlands

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Antisense oligonucleotides (AONs) in clinical development for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) aim to induce skipping of a specific exon of the dystrophin transcript during pre-mRNA splicing. This results in restoration of the open reading frame and consequently synthesis of a dystrophin protein with a shorter yet functional central rod domain. To monitor the molecular therapeutic effect of exon skip-inducing AONs in clinical studies, accurate quantification of pre- and post-treatment exon skip levels is required. With the recent introduction of 3rd generation digital droplet PCR (ddPCR), a state-of-the-arttechnology became available which allows absolute quantification of transcript copy numbers with and without specific exon skip with high precision, sensitivity and reproducibility. Using Taqman assays with probes targeting specific exon-exon junctions, we here demonstrate that ddPCR reproducibly quantified cDNA fragments with and without exon 51 of the DMD gene over a 4-log dynamic range. In a comparison of conventional nested PCR, qPCR and ddPCR using cDNA constructs with and without exon 51 mixed in different molar ratios using, ddPCR quantification came closest to the expected outcome over the full range of ratios (0-100%), while qPCR and in particular nested PCR overestimated the relative percentage of the construct lacking exon 51. Highest accuracy was similarly obtained with ddPCR in DMD patient-derived muscle cells treated with an AON inducing exon 51 skipping. We therefore recommend implementation of ddPCR for quantification of exon skip efficiencies of AONs in (pre)clinical development for DMD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据