ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2020
Comparison of paired cerebrospinal fluid and serum cell-free mitochondrial and nuclear DNA with copy number and fragment length.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bulk and single-cell transcriptome profiling reveals the dynamic immune response in granulomatous amebic encephalitis caused byFrontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Clinical Circulating Tumor DNA Testing for Precision Oncology.Cancer research and treatment · 2023Article
- The Value of Whole-Genome Sequencing for Mitochondrial DNA Population Studies: Strategies and Criteria for Extracting High-Quality Mitogenome Haplotypes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Comparison of paired cerebrospinal fluid and serum cell-free mitochondrial and nuclear DNA with copy number and fragment length.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMost studies on cell-free DNA (cfDNA) were only for single body fluids; however, the differences in cfDNA distribution between two body fluids are rarely reported. Hence, in this work, we compared the differences in cfDNA distribution between cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and serum of patients with brain-related diseases.
methodsThe fragment length of cfDNA was determined by using Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer. The copy numbers of cell-free mitochondrial DNA (cf-mtDNA) and cell-free nuclear DNA (cf-nDNA) were determined by using real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) with three pairs of mitochondrial ND1 and nuclear GAPDH primers, respectively.
resultsThere were short (~60 bp), medium (~167 bp), and long (>250 bp) cfDNA fragment length distributions totally obtained from CSF and serum using Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer. The results of both qPCR and ddPCR confirmed the existence of these three cfDNA fragment ranges in CSF and serum. According to qPCR, the copy numbers of long cf-mtDNA, medium, and long cf-nDNA in CSF were significantly higher than in paired serum. In CSF, only long cf-mtDNA's copy numbers were higher than long cf-nDNA. But in serum, the copy numbers of medium and long cf-mtDNA were higher than the corresponding cf-nDNA.
conclusionThe cf-nDNA and cf-mtDNA with different fragment lengths differentially distributed in the CSF and serum of patients with brain disorders, which might serve as a biomarker of human brain diseases.
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.