Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15767273›Full record

ArticleNucleic acids research2005

Competitive enzymatic reaction to control allele-specific extensions.

Emilie Hultin, Max Käller, Afshin Ahmadian, Joakim Lundeberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nucleic acids research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Creating advanced multifunctional biosensors with surface enzymatic transformations.Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids · 2006
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Emilie HultinRoyal Institute of Technology (KTH), AlbaNova University Center, School of Biotechnology SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden.
Max Käller
Afshin Ahmadian
Joakim Lundeberg

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Here, we present a novel method for SNP genotyping based on protease-mediated allele-specific primer extension (PrASE), where the two allele-specific extension primers only differ in their 3'-positions. As reported previously [Ahmadian,A., Gharizadeh,B., O'Meara,D., Odeberg,J. and Lundeberg,J. (2001), Nucleic Acids Res., 29, e121], the kinetics of perfectly matched primer extension is faster than mismatched primer extension. In this study, we have utilized this difference in kinetics by adding protease, a protein-degrading enzyme, to discriminate between the extension reactions. The competition between the polymerase activity and the enzymatic degradation yields extension of the perfectly matched primer, while the slower extension of mismatched primer is eliminated. To allow multiplex and simultaneous detection of the investigated single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), each extension primer was given a unique signature tag sequence on its 5' end, complementary to a tag on a generic array. A multiplex nested PCR with 13 SNPs was performed in a total of 36 individuals and their alleles were scored. To demonstrate the improvements in scoring SNPs by PrASE, we also genotyped the individuals without inclusion of protease in the extension. We conclude that the developed assay is highly allele-specific, with excellent multiplex SNP capabilities.

Indexed as

AllelesPolymerase Chain ReactionPolymorphism, Single NucleotideDNA Polymerase IDNA PrimersEndopeptidase KGenotypeHumansOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisSequence Analysis, DNADNA Polymerase IDNA PrimersEndopeptidase K

Identifiers

PMID15767273
PMCPMC1065263

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.