» Articles » PMID: 32052066

PCR Inhibition in QPCR, DPCR and MPS-mechanisms and Solutions

Overview
Specialty Chemistry
Date 2020 Feb 14
PMID 32052066
Citations 74
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

DNA analysis has seen an incredible development in terms of instrumentation, assays and applications over the last years. Massively parallel sequencing (MPS) and digital PCR are now broadly applied in research and diagnostics, and quantitative PCR is used for more and more practises. All these techniques are based on in vitro DNA polymerization and fluorescence measurements. A major limitation for successful analysis is the various sample-related substances that interfere with the analysis, i.e. PCR inhibitors. PCR inhibition affects library preparation in MPS analysis and skews quantification in qPCR, and some inhibitors have been found to quench the fluorescence of the applied fluorophores. Here, we provide a deeper understanding of mechanisms of specific PCR inhibitors and how these impact specific analytical techniques. This background knowledge is necessary in order to take full advantage of modern DNA analysis techniques, specifically for analysis of samples with low amounts of template and high amounts of background material. The classical solution to handle PCR inhibition is to purify or dilute DNA extracts, which leads to DNA loss. Applying inhibitor-tolerant DNA polymerases, either single enzymes or blends, provides a more straightforward and powerful solution. This review includes mechanisms of specific PCR inhibitors as well as solutions to the inhibition problem in relation to cutting-edge DNA analysis.

Citing Articles

Enhancement of the Precision ID Mitochondrial DNA Whole Genome System for Challenging Unidentified Human Remains.

Canale L, Date-Chong M, Wallin J, Sheehan S, Battaglia J, Halsing M Genes (Basel). 2025; 16(2).

PMID: 40004450 PMC: 11855493. DOI: 10.3390/genes16020119.


Development of a qPCR assay to identify and differentiate insect-associated strains of the complex.

Doidge N, Allen J, Bushell R, Lynch M, Browning G, Marenda M J Vet Diagn Invest. 2025; 37(2):234-243.

PMID: 39865995 PMC: 11773504. DOI: 10.1177/10406387241313448.


Comparison of antibiotic resistance genes in swine manure storage pits of Iowa, USA.

Neher T, Soupir M, Andersen D, ONeill M, Howe A Front Antibiot. 2025; 2():1116785.

PMID: 39816658 PMC: 11732143. DOI: 10.3389/frabi.2023.1116785.


Systematic optimisation of crude buccal swab lysate protocols for use with the ForenSeq™ DNA Signature Prep Kit.

Martin D, Heathfield L Int J Legal Med. 2025; .

PMID: 39804482 DOI: 10.1007/s00414-024-03405-x.


An integrated methodological framework for the validation and verification of clinical testing by qRT-PCR.

Cardona-Ramirez C, Enriquez-Valencia C, Mendez-Callejas G, Barreto G, Tafur-Gomez G, Sanjuanelo-Corredor D Heliyon. 2025; 11(1):e41088.

PMID: 39801958 PMC: 11721250. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e41088.


References
1.
Hindson C, Chevillet J, Briggs H, Gallichotte E, Ruf I, Hindson B . Absolute quantification by droplet digital PCR versus analog real-time PCR. Nat Methods. 2013; 10(10):1003-5. PMC: 4118677. DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.2633. View

2.
Al-Soud W, Radstrom P . Purification and characterization of PCR-inhibitory components in blood cells. J Clin Microbiol. 2001; 39(2):485-93. PMC: 87763. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.39.2.485-493.2001. View

3.
Fuller C, Middendorf L, Benner S, Church G, Harris T, Huang X . The challenges of sequencing by synthesis. Nat Biotechnol. 2009; 27(11):1013-23. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.1585. View

4.
Al-Soud W, Jonsson L, Radstrom P . Identification and characterization of immunoglobulin G in blood as a major inhibitor of diagnostic PCR. J Clin Microbiol. 2000; 38(1):345-50. PMC: 88721. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.38.1.345-350.2000. View

5.
Guo F, Yu J, Zhang L, Li J . Massively parallel sequencing of forensic STRs and SNPs using the Illumina ForenSeq™ DNA Signature Prep Kit on the MiSeq FGx™ Forensic Genomics System. Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2017; 31:135-148. DOI: 10.1016/j.fsigen.2017.09.003. View