ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2015
Comparison of a simple-probe real-time PCR and multiplex PCR techniques for HPA-1 to HPA-6 and HPA-15 genotyping.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Novel SimpleProbe PCR Assay for Detection of Mutations in the 23S rRNA Gene Associated with Macrolide Resistance in Mycoplasma genitalium in Clinical Samples.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2016Article
- Performance of a microarray-based genotyping system for red cell and platelet antigens in China.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2015Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to compare HPA-1 to HPA-6 and HPA-15 genotyping results obtained by a simple-probe real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique with the multiplex PCR technique.
methodsFive hundred DNA samples from the Thai National Stem Cell Donor Registry (TSCDR) of the National Blood Centre, Thai Red Cross Society were included. Human platelet antigen (HPA) genotyping was performed by simple-probe real-time PCR and multiplex PCR techniques.
resultsHPA-1, HPA-2, HPA-3, and HPA-4 genotyping results obtained by both techniques were in agreement. The misinterpretation of HPA-5, HPA-6, and HPA-15 genotypes was found in eight samples by simple-probe real-time PCR and HPA genotypes were confirmed by DNA sequencing. Two samples of HPA-5 were misinterpreted as HPA-5a5a instead of HPA-5a5b due to an NM_002203.3:c.1594A>C mutation (rs199808499) near the HPA-5 polymorphism (5' side). Five samples of HPA-6a6b were misinterpreted as HPA-6b6b because of an NM_000212.2:c.1545G>A mutation (rs4634) adjacent to the HPA-6 polymorphism (3' side). Interestingly, one sample of HPA-15a15b was misinterpreted as HPA-15b15b due to an NM_133493.1:c.2118C>A mutation near the HPA-15 polymorphism (3' side).
conclusionsHPA genotyping results by two PCR techniques were compared. Incorrect assignments were found due to genetic variations near each HPA single nucleotide polymorphism. Therefore, to avoid false assignation, the use of two genotyping techniques is 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.