ArticleFrontiers in medicine2019
Automated Sample Storage in Biobanking to Enhance Translational Research: The Bumpy Road to Implementation.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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.
- State-of-the-Art Liver Cancer Organoids: Modeling Cancer Stem Cell Heterogeneity for Personalized Treatment.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2025Review
- Improved Biorepository to Support Sickle Cell Disease Genomics and Clinical Research: A Practical Approach to Link Patient Data and Biospecimens from Muhimbili Sickle Cell Program, Tanzania.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2024Article
- Establishment of biobank facility at Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Institute of Iran: experiences, challenges, and future outlook.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The low reproducibility of biomarker research is a major holdback for the translation of research results to the bedside. Sample integrity has been identified as a key factor that contributes to improved reproducibility. The key mission of biobanks is to ensure that all activities and materials are managed according to standardized procedures and best practices to ensure and preserve sample integrity. When handling large numbers of biospecimens automation of sample handling and storage is often the method of choice to maintain and improve sample integrity. In December 2013, the centralized Biobank of the University Hospitals and the Catholic University of Leuven (UZ KU Leuven) decided to implement automated systems for sample storage and retrieval, one for storage at -20°C and one for storage at -80°C. Here we describe the extensive process of installation, acceptance, validation, and implementation of these two systems. Overall it took about 4 years to effectively take the systems into production. Multiple issues resulted in the delayed implementation, with labware change, quality of the initial installation, and misunderstanding of biobank concerns being the most impacting. Significant effort in terms of time and resources from both the automated store supplier as well as the biobank itself was needed to achieve a successful implementation. Within 15 months of actual integration in the biobank workflow, over 63 k samples were placed into the systems. Actual hands-on sample handling and retrieval times were substantially reduced, although this implied the shift of dedicated personnel time from the researchers' laboratories to the biobank. With the successful implementation of automated frozen sample storage systems, the centralized UZ KU Leuven Biobank is now also able to efficiently support large-scale translational research.
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.