ArticleJournal of biomolecular techniques : JBT2011
Comparison of DNA extraction methods from small samples of newborn screening cards suitable for retrospective perinatal viral research.
Article in Journal of biomolecular techniques : JBT, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and forensic validation of human genomic DNA quantification kit.International journal of legal medicine · 2020Article
- Optimization of Chelex 100 resin-based extraction of genomic DNA from dried blood spots.Biology methods & protocols · 2020Article
- Delivery of herpes simplex virus to retinal ganglion cell axon is dependent on viral protein Us9.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reliable detection of viral DNA in stored newborn screening cards (NSC) would give important insight into possible silent infection during pregnancy and around birth. We sought a DNA extraction method with sufficient sensitivity to detect low copy numbers of viral DNA from small punch samples of NSC. Blank NSC were spotted with seronegative EDTA-blood and seropositive EBV EDTA-blood. DNA was extracted with commercial and noncommercial DNA extraction methods and quantified on a spectrofluorometer using a PicoGreen dsDNA quantification kit. Serial dilutions of purified viral DNA controls determined the sensitivity of the amplification protocol, and seropositive EBV EDTA-blood amplified by nested PCR (nPCR) validated the DNA extraction methods. There were considerable differences between the commercial and noncommercial DNA extraction methods (P=0.014; P=0.016). Commercial kits compared favorably, but the QIamp DNA micro kit with an added forensic filter step was marginally more sensitive. The mean DNA yield from this method was 3 ng/μl. The limit of detection was 10 viral genome copies in a 50-μl reaction. EBV nPCR detection in neat and 1:10 diluted DNA extracts could be replicated reliably. We conclude that the QIamp Micro DNA extraction method with the added forensic spin-filter step was suitable for retrospective DNA viral assays from NSC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21455476PMC3059536W1585646133What 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.