ArticleJapanese journal of cancer research : Gann2000
Evaluation of the reliability of chromosomal imbalances detected by combined use of universal DNA amplification and comparative genomic hybridization.
Article in Japanese journal of cancer research : Gann, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Identification of frequent cytogenetic aberrations in hepatocellular carcinoma using gene-expression microarray data.Genome biology · 2002Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analysis of microscopic tumor samples is allowed by universal DNA amplification using degenerate oligonucleotide primed-PCR (DOP-PCR). To evaluate the reliablity of DOP-PCR CGH, we performed DOP-PCR CGH and standard CGH in parallel using DNAs extracted from 10 malignant tumors of the hepatobiliary tract and pancreas. Similar results were obtained by both methods with a few exceptions, indicating that DOP-PCR CGH provides cytogenetic information equivalent to that obtained from standard CGH. We also investigated the sensitivity of DOP-PCR CGH using sequential dilutions of DNA from microdissected tumor cells. DOP-PCR using 100 to 800 pg of template DNA yielded successful CGH results. However, less than 50 pg of template DNA was not suitable because of the small amount of generated DNA. These findings suggest that DOP-PCR CGH is applicable for CGH analysis of tiny specimens which are too small for standard CGH. Accordingly, DOP-PCR CGH analysis may become a useful method in clinical laboratory examination.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.