ArticleScientific reports2018
Evaluation of digital real-time PCR assay as a molecular diagnostic tool for single-cell analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep Learning-Guided Engineering ofMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Digital PCR for Single-Cell Analysis.Biosensors · 2024Review
- A Novel Multi-Gene Detection Platform for the Analysis of miRNA Expression.Scientific reports · 2018Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In a single-cell study, isolating and identifying single cells are essential, but these processes often require a large investment of time or money. The aim of this study was to isolate and analyse single cells using a novel platform, the PanelChip™ Analysis System, which includes 2500 microwells chip and a digital real-time polymerase chain reaction (dqPCR) assay, in comparison with a standard PCR (qPCR) assay. Through the serial dilution of a known concentration standard, namely pUC19, the accuracy and sensitivity levels of two methodologies were compared. The two systems were tested on the basis of expression levels of the genetic markers vimentin, E-cadherin, N-cadherin and GAPDH in A549 lung carcinoma cells at two known concentrations. Furthermore, the influence of a known PCR inhibitor commonly found in blood samples, heparin, was evaluated in both methodologies. Finally, mathematical models were proposed and separation method of single cells was verified; moreover, gene expression levels during epithelial-mesenchymal transition in single cells under TGFβ1 treatment were measured. The drawn conclusion is that dqPCR performed using PanelChip™ is superior to the standard qPCR in terms of sensitivity, precision, and heparin tolerance. The dqPCR assay is a potential tool for clinical diagnosis and single-cell applications.
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.