A simple experimental design set-up for DNA profile amplification that we are calling “quantitative DNA analysis” can provide for optimized and simplified DNA profiling kit validations, better evaluations of competency, maximization of successful DNA processing in casework, and a means to achieve unified DNA interpretation results across many labs with any platform. 

Quantitative DNA analysis experimental results showing linearity of 0.98 or greater can vet datasets that provide a full assessment of all measurement uncertainties present in A DNA testing platform for compliance with ISO/IEC 17025 standard 7.6 regarding uncertainty of measurement.  

When this experiment achieves 0.98 or greater linearity results, it can be used to vet kit performance as well as novel procedural choice, deviation and innovation according to ISO17025 standard 7.2, validity of results as per ISO 17025 standard 7.7, as well as individual trainee or staff performance to ISO17025 standard 6.2. 

Validation data-sets utilizing quantitative DNA analysis experimental design can be vetted by achieving linearity of 0/98 or greater.  In this way, any further change in parameters can also be proven legitimate (or not) in the same way, thus demonstrating that sensitivity, linearity, and thresholds do not significantly change or worsen with adjustment to said parameters.  Labs can therefore legitimize new techniques and processes while achieving unity of interpretation with other labs.   The following can be legitimized:  1) any choice of reaction volume, 2) any choice of cycle number used in PCR, 3) any choice of GA parameters (such as preferred analyte concentration or preferred injection time), 4) the objective and empirical calculation of stochastic data to use in setting a stochastic threshold, 5) the objective and empirical calculation of peak height ratio imbalance data for use in interpretations, 6) the value of traditional consensus amplification for sample interpretation, 7) proof that the GA device is capable of peak detection that is linear over a suitably large dynamic range, and 8) competency testing of individual in trainings, group processing, or fit-for-purpose studies upstream or downstream in the process.

Authors

• Valerie Mattimore-Fuller (ICITAP-Department of Justice, United States of America)
• I. Ekam-Ukele (National Counter Terrorism Centre, Nigeria)
• T. Rabiu (National Counter Terrorism Centre, Nigeria)
• L. Boniface (National Counter Terrorism Centre, Nigeria)
• H. Tanimu (National Counter Terrorism Centre, Nigeria)