ArticleBiosensors & bioelectronics2015
Label free detection of 5'hydroxymethylcytosine within CpG islands using optical sensors.
Article in Biosensors & bioelectronics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tracking Globally 5-Methylcytosine and Its Oxidized Derivatives in Colorectal Cancer Epigenome Using Bioelectroanalytical Technologies.ACS sensors · 2025Article
- Engineering photonics solutions for COVID-19.APL photonics · 2020Review
- Advanced Evanescent-Wave Optical Biosensors for the Detection of Nucleic Acids: An Analytic Perspective.Frontiers in chemistry · 2019Review
- Applications of Optical Microcavity Resonators in Analytical Chemistry.Annual review of analytical chemistry (Palo Alto, Calif.) · 2016Article
- Low temperature co-fired ceramic packaging of CMOS capacitive sensor chip towards cell viability monitoring.Beilstein journal of nanotechnology · 2016Article
- Label-free, single molecule resonant cavity detection: a double-blind experimental study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Significant research has been invested in correlating genetic variations with different disease probabilities. Recently, it has become apparent that other DNA modifications, such as the addition of a methyl or hydroxymethyl group to cytosine, can also play a role. While these modifications do not change the sequence, they can negatively impact the function. Therefore, it is critical to be able to both read the genetic code and identify these modifications. Currently, the detection of hydroxymethylated cytosine (5'hmC) and the two closely related variants, cytosine (C) and 5'methylcytosine (5'mC), relies on a combination of nucleotide modification steps, followed by PCR and gene sequencing. However, this approach is not ideal because transcription errors which are inherent to the PCR process can be misinterpreted as fluctuations in the relative C:5'mC:5'hmC concentrations. As such, an alternative method which does not rely on PCR or nucleotide modification is desirable. One approach is based on label-free optical resonant cavity sensors. In the present work, toroidal resonant cavity sensors are functionalized with antibodies to enable label-free detection and discrimination between C, 5'mC, and 5'hmC in real-time without PCR. Specifically, epoxide chemistry is used to covalently attach the 5'hmC antibody to the surface of the cavity. Subsequently, to thoroughly characterize the sensor platform, detection of C, 5'mC, and 5'hmC is performed over a concentration range from pM to nM. At low (pM) concentrations, the hydroxymethylated cytosine produces a significantly larger signal than the structurally similar epigenetic markers; thus demonstrating the applicability of this platform.
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.