Asian Journal of Transfusion Science
Home About Journal Editorial Board Search Current Issue Ahead of print Back Issues Instructions Subscribe Login  Users: 1613 Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 13  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 95-99

Comparison of UV spectrometry and fluorometry-based methods for quantification of cell-free DNA in red cell components


Department of Transfusion Medicine, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Dheeraj Khetan
Department of Transfusion Medicine, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow - 226 014, Uttar Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ajts.AJTS_90_19

Rights and Permissions

BACKGROUND: Stress and shear force applied on blood components during processing and storage may induce cellular damage leading to release of cell-free DNA (cfDNA). In this study, we have compared ultraviolet (UV) spectrophotometry with UV-induced fluorescence for the quantification of cfDNA in red cell supernatant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: cfDNA was extracted from 200 μL sample of supernatants from 99 packed red blood cells using QIAamp DNA Blood Mini Kit (Qiagen, Germany). Quantification of cfDNA was done using two different methods: one based on spectrophotometry (NanoDrop 2000c, ThermoFisher Scientific, USA) and another based on fluorometry (Qubit 2.0, Life Technologies, ThermoFisher Scientific, USA). Interassay variability of both the methods was estimated using serial dilutions of standard with known DNA concentration. RESULTS: DNA quantification by both the methods was close to actual amount of known standard in dilutions with higher concentration of DNA (21.68 to 2.71 ng/μl). While at higher dilutions, quantification by NanoDrop was neither precise nor accurate. Median cfDNA concentration in the study units was found to be 1.60 ng/μl (25th–75th percentile range: 1.10–2.10) by UV spectrophotometry (NanoDrop) compared to 0.080 ng/μl (25th–75th percentile range: 0.050–0.130) by fluorometry (Qubit). CONCLUSION: Due to high interassay variability between the two methods and the better precision and accuracy of Qubit, it is recommended that fluorometry-based method be used for the quantification of cfDNA in blood components.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed258    
    Printed8    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded0    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

 

Association Contact us | Sitemap | Advertise | What's New | Feedback | Copyright and Disclaimer

2006 - Asian Journal of Transfusion Science | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 10th November, 2006