ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2014
Novel DNA chip based on a modified DigiTag2 assay for high-throughput species identification and genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex isolates.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2014. 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.
- The MAGMA pipeline for comprehensive genomic analyses of clinical Mycobacterium tuberculosis samples.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- A Bioinformatics Whole-Genome Sequencing Workflow for Clinical Mycobacterium tuberculosis Complex Isolate Analysis, Validated Using a Reference Collection Extensively Characterized with Conventional Methods andJournal of clinical microbiology · 2021Article
- Cas12a/Guide RNA-Based Platform for Rapid and Accurate Identification of MajorJournal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- Genetic structure and relationships of 16 Asian and European cattle populations using DigiTag2 assay.Animal science journal = Nihon chikusan Gakkaiho · 2016Review
- Genetic diversity and dynamic distribution of Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates causing pulmonary and extrapulmonary tuberculosis in Thailand.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A multipurpose high-throughput genotyping tool for the assessment of recent epidemiological data and evolutional pattern in Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) clinical isolates was developed in this study. To facilitate processing, 51 highly informative single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were selected for discriminating the clinically most relevant MTBC species and genotyping M. tuberculosis into its principle genetic groups (PGGs) and SNP cluster groups (SCGs). Because of the high flexibility of the DigiTag2 assay, the identical protocol and DNA array containing the identical set of probes were applied to the highly GC-rich mycobacterial genome. The specific primers with multiplex amplification and hybridization conditions based on the DigiTag2 principle were optimized and evaluated with 14 MTBC reference strains, 4 nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) isolates, and 322 characterized M. tuberculosis clinical isolates. The DNA chip that was developed revealed a 99.85% call rate, a 100% conversion rate, and 99.75% reproducibility. For the accuracy rate, 98.94% of positive calls were consistent with previous molecular characterizations. Our cost-effective technology was capable of simultaneously identifying the MTBC species and the genotypes of 96 M. tuberculosis clinical isolates within 6 h using only simple instruments, such as a thermal cycler, a hybridization oven, and a DNA chip scanner, and less technician skill was required than for other techniques. We demonstrate this approach's potential as a simple, flexible, and rapid tool for providing clearer information regarding circulating MTBC isolates.
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.