ArticleCroatian medical journal2009
Malignant tumors and forensics--dilemmas and proposals.
Article in Croatian medical journal, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- InDEL instability in two different tumoral tissues and its forensic significance.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2024Article
- Effect of Carcinomas on Autosomal Trait Screening: A Review Article.Current issues in molecular biology · 2023Review
- Comparison of the Allelic Alterations between InDel and STR Markers in Tumoral Tissues Used for Forensic Purposes.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Article
- DNA isolated from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded healthy tissue after 30 years of storage can be used for forensic studies.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the effect of genetic instability and degradation in archived histology samples from cancerous tumors and to investigate the validity of short tandem repeat (STR) typing of these samples and its potential effect on human identification.
methodsTwo hundred and twenty eight slides of archival pathology tissues from 13 different types of malignant tumors were compared with healthy tissues from the same individuals. DNA analysis was performed using standard techniques for forensic STR analysis, PowerPlex16 and Identifiler on 2 distinct sample sets. Genetic instability was assessed by comparing reference tissues with cancerous tissues derived from the same individual. Loss of heterozygosity, a > or =50% reduction in heterozygosity ratio between healthy and diseased samples, and microsatellite instability, the presence of an additional allele not present in reference tissue, were assessed. The quality of profiles obtained with respect to completeness among the archived samples and degradation using the 2 platforms were also compared.
resultsProfiles obtained using the Identifiler system were generally more complete, but showed 3-fold higher levels of instability (86%) than those obtained using PowerPlex 16 (27%). Instances of genetic instability were distributed throughout all loci in both multiplex STR systems.
conclusionAfter having compared 2 widely used forensic chemistries, we suggest individual validation of each kit for use with samples likely to exhibit instability combined with fixation induced degradation or artifact. A "one size fits all" approach for interpretation of these samples among commercially available multiplexes is not recommended.
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.