Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30278058›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

A multicenter comparison of quantification methods for antisense oligonucleotide-induced DMD exon 51 skipping in Duchenne muscular dystrophy cell cultures.

Monika Hiller, Maria Sofia Falzarano, Iker Garcia-Jimenez, Valentina Sardone, Ruurd C Verheul, Linda Popplewell, Karen Anthony, Estibaliz Ruiz-Del-Yerro, Hana Osman, Jelle J Goeman and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
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. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Consensus Guidelines for the Design andNucleic acid therapeutics · 2023
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Premature termination codons in theProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  15. 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

18 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Monika HillerDepartment of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3420-5840
Maria Sofia FalzaranoUOL of Medical Genetics, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Iker Garcia-JimenezNeuromuscular Disorders Group, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Spain.
Valentina SardoneDubowitz Neuromuscular Centre, University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, United Kingdom.
Ruurd C VerheulBioMarin Nederland B.V., Leiden, The Netherlands.
Linda PopplewellCentre of Biomedical Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Royal Holloway University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Karen AnthonyDubowitz Neuromuscular Centre, University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, United Kingdom.
Estibaliz Ruiz-Del-YerroNeuromuscular Disorders Group, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Spain.
Hana OsmanUOL of Medical Genetics, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Jelle J GoemanDepartment of Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Kamel MamchaouiINSERM, Institute of Myology, Center of Research in Myology, Sorbonne Universities, UPMC Univ Paris 6, Paris, France.
George DicksonCentre of Biomedical Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Royal Holloway University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Alessandra FerliniUOL of Medical Genetics, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Francesco MuntoniDubowitz Neuromuscular Centre, University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, United Kingdom.
Annemieke Aartsma-RusDepartment of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Virginia Arechavala-GomezaNeuromuscular Disorders Group, Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Spain.
Nicole A DatsonBioMarin Nederland B.V., Leiden, The Netherlands.
Pietro SpitaliDepartment of Human Genetics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Leiden University Medical Center · NLBioCruces Health research Institute · ESGreat Ormond Street Hospital · GBUniversity of Ferrara · ITBioMarin (Netherlands) · NLRoyal Holloway University of London · GBInserm · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuchenne muscular dystrophy is a lethal disease caused by lack of dystrophin. Skipping of exons adjacent to out-of-frame deletions has proven to restore dystrophin expression in Duchenne patients. Exon 51 has been the most studied target in both preclinical and clinical settings and the availability of standardized procedures to quantify exon skipping would be advantageous for the evaluation of preclinical and clinical data.

objectiveTo compare methods currently used to quantify antisense oligonucleotide-induced exon 51 skipping in the DMD transcript and to provide guidance about the method to use.

methodsSix laboratories shared blinded RNA samples from Duchenne patient-derived muscle cells treated with different amounts of exon 51 targeting antisense oligonucleotide. Exon 51 skipping levels were quantified using five different techniques: digital droplet PCR, single PCR assessed with Agilent bioanalyzer, nested PCR with agarose gel image analysis by either ImageJ or GeneTools software and quantitative real-time PCR.

resultsDifferences in mean exon skipping levels and dispersion around the mean were observed across the different techniques. Results obtained by digital droplet PCR were reproducible and showed the smallest dispersion. Exon skipping quantification with the other methods showed overestimation of exon skipping or high data variation.

conclusionsOur results suggest that digital droplet PCR was the most precise and quantitative method. The quantification of exon 51 skipping by Agilent bioanalyzer after a single round of PCR was the second-best choice with a 2.3-fold overestimation of exon 51 skipping levels compared to digital droplet PCR.

Indexed as

Oligonucleotides, AntisenseRNA SplicingCell LineDystrophinExonsHumansMuscular Dystrophy, DuchenneMyoblastsPolymerase Chain ReactionDMD protein, humanDystrophinOligonucleotides, Antisense

Identifiers

PMID30278058
PMCPMC6168132
OpenAlexW2894880985

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.