ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2020
Improvement of digital PCR conditions for direct detection of KRAS mutations.
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 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- KRAS mutations detection methodology: from RFLP to CRISPR/Cas based methods.Functional & integrative genomics · 2024Review
- TP53 mutation detected in circulating exosomal DNA is associated with prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.Cancer biology & therapy · 2022Article
- Improvement of digital PCR conditions for direct detection of KRAS mutations.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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn standard analytical conditions, an isolation step is essential for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis. The necessity of this step becomes unclear with the development of highly sensitive detection methods. The aim of this study was to evaluate ctDNA mimetic nDNA detection as reference materials (RMs) using dPCR technologies either directly from serum or without serum.
methodsTo determine an absolute count of both mutation and wild-type bearing DNA molecules, genomic DNA (gDNA) and nucleosomal DNA (nDNA), which are similar in size to cell-free DNA, were evaluated. We tested 3 KRAS mutations in colorectal cancer cell lines.
resultsWe describe the recent progress in RMs. The short DNA fragments, such as sDNA and nDNA, exhibited higher quantitative values of dPCR compared to gDNA. The efficiency between Atlantis dsDNase (AD) and Micrococcal Nuclease (MN) affects DNA quantification. Moreover, there was a significant difference in dPCR output when spiking gDNA or nDNA containing KRAS mutations into FBS compared to the dPCR output under non-FBS conditions.
conclusionThe matrix effect crucially affects the accuracy of gDNA and nDNA level estimation in the direct detection of mimic of patient samples. The form of reference material we proposed should be optimized for various conditions to develop reference materials that can accurately measure copy number and verify the detection of KRAS mutations in the matrix.
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.