ArticlePloS one2019
Rapid authentication of pharmaceuticals via DNA tagging and field detection.
Article in PloS one, 2019. 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.
- POSERS: A Steganography-Driven Molecular Tagging System Using Randomized DNA Sequences for Secure Authentication.ACS omega · 2025Article
- DNA-Based Chemical Unclonable Functions for Cryptographic Anticounterfeit Tagging of Pharmaceuticals.ACS nano · 2024Article
- Application of DNA sequences in anti-counterfeiting: Current progress and challenges.International journal of pharmaceutics · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A small PCR-generated DNA fragment was introduced into a pharmaceutical grade ink as a molecular taggant, and the DNA tagged ink was delivered onto the surface of capsules by standard high-speed offset printing. The amount of DNA in the ink on each capsule is roughly 10-12 fold lower than that allowed as safe by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the WHO with regards to acceptable limits of residual DNA. The printed ink on the capsule surface was sampled by swabbing, followed by direct analysis of the DNA-swab complex, without subsequent DNA purification. It was shown that DNA recovered from the ink by swabbing was suitable for PCR-CE analysis-a widely used method in forensic science and was also suitable for qPCR and isothermal DNA amplification, when coupled with portable devices similar to those used for environmental sampling and food safety testing. The data set a precedent: A small DNA fragment could be introduced as an excipient into a pharmaceutical application, and thereafter tracked through the pharmaceutical supply chain via forensic DNA authentication.
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.