Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29329324›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Variability and cost implications of three generations of the Roche LightCycler® 480.

Maria Dullaert-de Boer, Onno W Akkerman, Marloes Vermeer, Dorine L J Hess, Huib A M Kerstjens, Richard M Anthony, Tjip S van der Werf, Dick van Soolingen, Adri G M van der Zanden

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Maria Dullaert-de BoerLaboratory for Medical Microbiology and Public Health, Hengelo, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3985-1203
Onno W AkkermanUniversity of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Pulmonary diseases and Tuberculosis, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Marloes VermeerZGT Academy, ZGT, Almelo The Netherlands.
Dorine L J HessLaboratory for Medical Microbiology and Public Health, Hengelo, The Netherlands.
Huib A M KerstjensUniversity of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Pulmonary diseases and Tuberculosis, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Richard M AnthonyTuberculosis reference laboratory, Center for Infectious Disease Research, Diagnostics and Perinatal Screening (IDS), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Tjip S van der WerfUniversity of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Pulmonary diseases and Tuberculosis, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Dick van SoolingenTuberculosis reference laboratory, Center for Infectious Disease Research, Diagnostics and Perinatal Screening (IDS), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Adri G M van der ZandenLaboratory for Medical Microbiology and Public Health, Hengelo, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Groningen · NLNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment · NLZiekenhuis Groep Twente · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Real time PCR has become a dominant method for the highly sensitive detection of pathogens in clinical material. Real time PCR can generate a fluorescence signal by using fluorescence labelled probes, allowing us to detect and semi quantify the amount of amplified DNA. Here we test the variability of the detection system and cost implications of three different versions of the LightCycler® 480 (LC480), focusing on the intensity of fluorescence and Cq in monoplex and multiplex rtPCRs. For gastro-intestinal pathogens there was no correlation between the intensity of fluorescence and the Cq value in the different LC480 types. For probes with the dyes FAMTM, HEXTM, Cy5 and Red610 a higher fluorescence intensity was seen in LC480 type II and III compared to LC480 type I. After lowering the probe concentration for the Cy5 dye three-fold (from 0.3μM to 0.1μM) the Cq value remains the same and the intensity of fluorescence decreases. For the LC480 type II and III the difference in fluorescence intensity was much more extreme. The concentration of the different labelled probes can be lowered at least six-fold in LC480 type II and III cyclers while maintaining a fluorescence intensity as high as achieved in the LC480 type I with undiluted probe. In conclusion, the strength of the fluorescence signal of the LightCycler® 480 type III is superior to that of LightCycler® 480 types I and II, allowing the use of lower probe concentrations for all dyes, particularly for the dyes Red610 and Cy5. This results in a two thirds reduction in PCR probe costs. Switching to these newer machines for real-time PCR can reduce dye labelled probe consumption and thus reduce costs significantly.

Indexed as

Costs and Cost AnalysisLightFluorescenceFluorescent DyesReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionFluorescent Dyes

Identifiers

PMID29329324
PMCPMC5766094
OpenAlexW2783015022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.