Molecular and Cell Biology Team, LGC, Teddington, UK.
Department of Infection, Division of Infection and Immunity, University College London, London, UK.
Sci Rep. 2017 Apr 26;7(1):1209. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-01221-5.
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 (R = 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.
建立治愈 HIV 的方法受到潜伏感染细胞的持续存在的阻碍,这些细胞构成了病毒储存库。实时 qPCR 通过测量 HIV DNA 用于定量这个储存库,需要外部校准;校准物的常见选择是 8E5 细胞系,它被认为是稳定的,并且每个细胞含有一个 HIV 前病毒。相比之下,数字 PCR 不需要外部校准,并且可以提供“绝对”定量。我们比较了 qPCR 和 dPCR 在定量 18 个患者样本中的 HIV DNA 的性能。qPCR 检测到 18 个样本中有 HIV DNA,而 dPCR 检测到 15 个样本中有 HIV DNA,差异是由于 dPCR 分析的样本体积较小。这两种技术之间存在良好的定量相关性(R = 0.86),但平均而言,dPCR 值仅为 qPCR 值的 60%。令人惊讶的是,调查显示这种差异是由于 8E5 细胞校准物中 HIV DNA 的丢失所致。还发现来自另外两个来源的 8E5 提取物中每个细胞的 HIV DNA 拷贝数明显少于一个,并且在培养过程中 8E5 细胞中的 HIV 逐渐丢失。因此,我们建议在用作校准物之前,通过 dPCR 确定 8E5 提取物中 HIV 的拷贝数。