ArticleJournal of biological methods2019
Comparative analysis of diagnostic platforms for measurement of differentially methylated insulin DNA.
Article in Journal of biological methods, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cell-Free DNA Fragments as Biomarkers of Islet β-Cell Death in Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) has been intensively investigated as a diagnostic and prognostic marker for various cancers. In recent years, presence of unmethylated insulin cfDNA in the circulation has been correlated with pancreatic β-cell death and risk of developing type 1 diabetes. Digital (d)PCR is an increasingly popular method of quantifying insulin cfDNA due to its ability to determine absolute copy numbers, and its increased sensitivity when compared to the more routinely used quantitative PCR. Multiple platforms have been developed to carry out dPCR. However, not all technologies perform comparably, thereby necessitating evaluation of each platform. Here, we compare two dPCR platforms: the QuantStudio 3D (QS3D, Applied Biosystems) and the QX200 (Bio-Rad), to measure copies of unmethylated/methylated insulin plasmids. The QS3D detected greater copy numbers of the plasmids than the QX200 (manual mode), whereas QX200 demonstrated minimal replicate variability, increased throughput, ease of use and the potential for automation. Overall, the performance of QX200, in our hands, was better suited to measure differentially methylated insulin cfDNA.
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.