Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29509709›Full record

ReviewGenes2018

Cell-Free Approaches in Synthetic Biology Utilizing Microfluidics.

Samar Damiati, Rami Mhanna, Rimantas Kodzius, Eva-Kathrin Ehmoser

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Simple microfluidic devices forFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Review
  6. Bottom-Up Synthetic Biology Using Cell-Free Protein Synthesis.Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology · 2023
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Electrochemical Biosensors Based on S-Layer Proteins.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  17. International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Samar DamiatiDepartment of Biochemistry, Faculty of Science, King Abdulaziz University (KAU), Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia. sdamiati@kau.edu.sa.ORCID 0000-0002-6747-0408
Rami MhannaBiomedical Engineering Program, The American University of Beirut (AUB), Beirut 1107-2020, Lebanon. rm136@aub.edu.lb.ORCID 0000-0003-0345-625X
Rimantas KodziusMathematics and Natural Sciences Department, The American University of Iraq, Sulaimani, Sulaymaniyah 46001, Iraq. kodzius@envirola.com.ORCID 0000-0001-9417-8894
Eva-Kathrin EhmoserDepartment of Nanobiotechnology, Institute for Synthetic Bioarchitecture, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, 1190 Vienna, Austria. eva.sinner@boku.ac.at.ORCID 0000-0001-9201-268X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Synthetic biology is a rapidly growing multidisciplinary branch of science which aims to mimic complex biological systems by creating similar forms. Constructing an artificial system requires optimization at the gene and protein levels to allow the formation of entire biological pathways. Advances in cell-free synthetic biology have helped in discovering new genes, proteins, and pathways bypassing the complexity of the complex pathway interactions in living cells. Furthermore, this method is cost- and time-effective with access to the cellular protein factory without the membrane boundaries. The freedom of design, full automation, and mimicking of in vivo systems reveal advantages of synthetic biology that can improve the molecular understanding of processes, relevant for life science applications. In parallel, in vitro approaches have enhanced our understanding of the living system. This review highlights the recent evolution of cell-free gene design, proteins, and cells integrated with microfluidic platforms as a promising technology, which has allowed for the transformation of the concept of bioprocesses. Although several challenges remain, the manipulation of biological synthetic machinery in microfluidic devices as suitable 'homes' for in vitro protein synthesis has been proposed as a pioneering approach for the development of new platforms, relevant in biomedical and diagnostic contexts towards even the sensing and monitoring of environmental issues.

Indexed as

cell-free protein synthesisde novo gene synthesismicrofluidicssynthetic biology

Identifiers

PMID29509709
PMCPMC5867865

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.