Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32042315›Full record

ArticleMobile DNA2020

LUMI-PCR: an Illumina platform ligation-mediated PCR protocol for integration site cloning, provides molecular quantitation of integration sites.

Joanna C Dawes, Philip Webster, Barbara Iadarola, Claudia Garcia-Diaz, Marian Dore, Bruce J Bolt, Hamlata Dewchand, Gopuraja Dharmalingam, Alex P McLatchie, Jakub Kaczor and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Mobile DNA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Wristwatch PCR: A Versatile and Efficient Genome Walking Strategy.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022
    Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

15 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Joanna C Dawes *1MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences (LMS), Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.
Philip Webster *1MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences (LMS), Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.
Barbara Iadarola *1MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences (LMS), Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.
Claudia Garcia-Diaz *4Samantha Dickson Brain Cancer Unit, UCL Cancer Institute, WC1E 6DD, London, UK.
Marian Dore1MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences (LMS), Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.
Bruce J Bolt1MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences (LMS), Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.
Hamlata Dewchand1MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences (LMS), Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.
Gopuraja Dharmalingam1MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences (LMS), Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.
Alex P McLatchie5UCL Cancer Institute, WC1E 6DD, London, UK.
Jakub Kaczor1MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences (LMS), Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.
Juan J Caceres6Centre for Systems and Synthetic Biology, Department of Computer Science, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.
Alberto Paccanaro6Centre for Systems and Synthetic Biology, Department of Computer Science, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK.
Laurence Game1MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences (LMS), Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.
Simona Parrinello4Samantha Dickson Brain Cancer Unit, UCL Cancer Institute, WC1E 6DD, London, UK.
Anthony G Uren1MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences (LMS), Du Cane Road, London, W12 0NN UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6019-7111
MRC London Institute of Medical Sciences · GBCancer Research UK · GBRoyal Holloway University of London · GBCRUK Lung Cancer Centre of Excellence · GBImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/F00964X/1Cancer Research UK 21203Medical Research Council MC_UP_A652_1001Medical Research Council MC_UP_A652_1002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLigation-mediated PCR protocols have diverse uses including the identification of integration sites of insertional mutagens, integrating vectors and naturally occurring mobile genetic elements. For approaches that employ NGS sequencing, the relative abundance of integrations within a complex mixture is typically determined through the use of read counts or unique fragment lengths from a ligation of sheared DNA; however, these estimates may be skewed by PCR amplification biases and saturation of sequencing coverage.

resultsHere we describe a modification of our previous splinkerette based ligation-mediated PCR using a novel Illumina-compatible adapter design that prevents amplification of non-target DNA and incorporates unique molecular identifiers. This design reduces the number of PCR cycles required and improves relative quantitation of integration abundance for saturating sequencing coverage. By inverting the forked adapter strands from a standard orientation, the integration-genome junction can be sequenced without affecting the sequence diversity required for cluster generation on the flow cell. Replicate libraries of murine leukemia virus-infected spleen samples yielded highly reproducible quantitation of clonal integrations as well as a deep coverage of subclonal integrations. A dilution series of DNAs bearing integrations of MuLV or piggyBac transposon shows linearity of the quantitation over a range of concentrations.

conclusionsMerging ligation and library generation steps can reduce total PCR amplification cycles without sacrificing coverage or fidelity. The protocol is robust enough for use in a 96 well format using an automated liquid handler and we include programs for use of a Beckman Biomek liquid handling workstation. We also include an informatics pipeline that maps reads, builds integration contigs and quantitates integration abundance using both fragment lengths and unique molecular identifiers. Suggestions for optimizing the protocol to other target DNA sequences are included. The reproducible distinction of clonal and subclonal integration sites from each other allows for analysis of populations of cells undergoing selection, such as those found in insertional mutagenesis screens.

Indexed as

GeneticsGenomicsIntegration site cloningMutagenesisRetroviruses

Identifiers

PMID32042315
PMCPMC7001329
OpenAlexW3005842394

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.