ArticleHepatitis monthly2013
Development and Application of an In-house Line Probe Assay for Hepatitis C Virus Genotyping.
Article in Hepatitis monthly, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and Comparison of In-house Line Probe Assay (LiPA) and SYBR Green Real-time PCR Regarding the Detection of Periodontal Pathogens.Avicenna journal of medical biotechnologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHepatitis C virus (HCV) is the major cause of chronic liver disease. HCV is a single stranded positive sense RNA of approximately 9.6 Kb. Because of high conservativeness of 5΄untranslated region of HCV genome, it is widely used for virus genotyping. Different methods are used for the virus genotyping, but all involve some difficulties.
objectivesThe aim of the present study was to develop an in-house reverse hybridization method as a line probe assay, for HCV genotyping. MATERIALS AND
methodsSixty serum samples were collected with newly diagnosis of HCV infection. Genotyping process had already been performed for the samples using RT-PCR RFLP method. After total RNA extraction from the samples and cDNA synthesis, nested PCR method was applied for amplification of the target sequence on the 5΄UTR. In the nested PCR, biotinylated oligonucleotides were used as inner primers. Optimized concentrations of the biotinylated inner primers (as positive control), two universal and seven specific probes were spotted onto nylon membrane stripes in a defined pattern. Hybridization process was conducted between the probes and the denaturized biotin labeled PCR products. Finally, the stripes were developed by using streptavidin conjugated alkaline phosphate as a signal generating agent. To determine the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the home made LiPA, a panel containing 60 confirmed sera with positive results for HCV (and PCR-RFLP genotyped) was subjected to evaluate.
resultsAgarose gel electrophoresis of the nested PCR products using the outer and inner primers showed 305 and 234 bp fragments respectively. After performing hybridization and detection processes on the prepared strips, the colored bands were formed for the positive control, universal probes and the corresponding genotypes. HCV genotype results were found to be in 100% concordance through studying 60 sera that were successfully typed by the two methods. P-value of 0.045 conveys that the two methods were the same and had no significant difference.
conclusionsThe most common genotyping method in Iran is RT-PCR RFLP. Given the results and advantages of this homemade technique, such as high specificity and sensitivity, ability for detection of most genotypes, it provides possibility of evaluating much of the isolates without needing electrophoresis stage.
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.