Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28667577›Full record

ReviewMolecular diagnosis & therapy2017

The Role of BEAMing and Digital PCR for Multiplexed Analysis in Molecular Oncology in the Era of Next-Generation Sequencing.

Jérôme Alexandre Denis, Erell Guillerm, Florence Coulet, Annette K Larsen, Jean-Marc Lacorte

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular diagnosis & therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Liquid biopsy for early detection of lung cancer.Chinese medical journal pulmonary and critical care medicine · 2023
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Nuclease Enrichment and qPCR Detection of Rare Nucleotide Variants.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jérôme Alexandre DenisUPMC Univ Paris 06, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France. jerome.denis@aphp.fr.
Erell GuillermUPMC Univ Paris 06, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France.
Florence CouletUPMC Univ Paris 06, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France.
Annette K LarsenUPMC Univ Paris 06, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France.
Jean-Marc LacorteUPMC Univ Paris 06, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BEAMing polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and digital PCR (dPCR) are used for robust and accurate quantification of nucleic acids. These methods are particularly well suited for the identification of very small fractions (<1%) of variant copies such as the presence of mutant genes in a predominantly wild-type background. BEAMing and dPCR are increasingly used in diverse fields including bacteriology, virology, non-invasive prenatal testing, and oncology, in particular for the molecular analysis of liquid biopsies. In this review, we present the principles of BEAMing and dPCR as well as the trends of future technical development, focusing on the possibility of developing multiplexed mutation analysis. Finally, we will discuss why such techniques will remain useful despite the ever-decreasing costs and increased automatization of next-generation sequencing (NGS), using molecular characterization of cancer cells as an example.

Indexed as

BiopsyDNA Mutational AnalysisHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionNeoplasmsPolymerase Chain Reaction

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.