Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18832167›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2008

A procedure for highly specific, sensitive, and unbiased whole-genome amplification.

Xinghua Pan, Alexander Eckehart Urban, Dean Palejev, Vincent Schulz, Fabian Grubert, Yiping Hu, Michael Snyder, Sherman M Weissman

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing 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

55 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Revealing COBiodesign research · 2022
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Insertional activation ofScience advances · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Xinghua PanDepartment of Genetics, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06520-8005, USA. xinghua.pan@gmail.com
Alexander Eckehart Urban
Dean Palejev
Vincent Schulz
Fabian Grubert
Yiping Hu
Michael Snyder
Sherman M Weissman

Funding

Yale SPORE in Skin CancerP50CA121974 · NCI · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI DAVID F STERN · 2006 to 2026
$43.9M
Human Genome Array: Technology for Functional AnalysisP50HG002357 · NHGRI · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI SNYDER, MICHAEL P. · 2001 to 2010
$31.9M
YALE SKIN DISEASES RESEARCH CORE CENTERP30AR041942 · NIAMS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI TATTERSALL, PETER J. · 1992 to 2008
$5.8M
Yale Center of Excellence in Molecular HematologyP30DK072442 · NIDDK · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI KRAUSE, DIANE S · 2005 to 2010
$5.2M
Global Analysis of Chromatin during Lineage DevelopmentR01AG023111 · NIA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI WEISSMAN, SHERMAN MORTON · 2004 to 2009
$2.9M
NCI NIH HHS 1 P50 CA121974NCI NIH HHS P50 CA121974NHGRI NIH HHS HG02357-01NHGRI NIH HHS P50 HG002357NIAMS NIH HHS 5 P30 AR41942-14NIAMS NIH HHS P30 AR041942NIA NIH HHS R01 AG023111NIA NIH HHS R01 AG23111NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK072442NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK072442-03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Highly specific amplification of complex DNA pools without bias or template-independent products (TIPs) remains a challenge. We have developed a method using phi29 DNA polymerase and trehalose and optimized control of amplification to create micrograms of specific amplicons without TIPs from down to subfemtograms of DNA. With an input of as little as 0.5-2.5 ng of human gDNA or a few cells, the product could be close to native DNA in locus representation. The amplicons from 5 and 0.5 ng of DNA faithfully demonstrated all previously known heterozygous segmental duplications and deletions (3 Mb to 18 kb) located on chromosome 22 and even a homozygous deletion smaller than 1 kb with high-resolution chromosome-wide comparative genomic hybridization. With 550k Infinium BeadChip SNP typing, the >99.7% accuracy was compared favorably with results on unamplified DNA. Importantly, underrepresentation of chromosome termini that occurred with GenomiPhi v2 was greatly rescued with the present procedure, and the call rate and accuracy of SNP typing were also improved for the amplicons with a 0.5-ng, partially degraded DNA input. In addition, the amplification proceeded logarithmically in terms of total yield before saturation; the intact cells was amplified >50 times more efficiently than an equivalent amount of extracted DNA; and the locus imbalance for amplicons with 0.1 ng or lower input of DNA was variable, whereas for higher input it was largely reproducible. This procedure facilitates genomic analysis with single cells or other traces of DNA, and generates products suitable for analysis by massively parallel sequencing as well as microarray hybridization.

Indexed as

GenomeDNAGenomicsNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesNucleic Acid HybridizationOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSensitivity and SpecificityDNA

Identifiers

PMID18832167
PMCPMC2563063

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.