ArticleJournal for immunotherapy of cancer2020
Nanopore sequencing as a scalable, cost-effective platform for analyzing polyclonal vector integration sites following clinical T cell therapy.
Article in Journal for immunotherapy of cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The transformative impact of ultra-rapid nanopore sequencing in precision medicine.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Review
- Methodological landscape in the field of integration site identification of retroviruses and retroviral vectors.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- The next-generation DNA vaccine platforms and delivery systems: advances, challenges and prospects.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Genetic identification of three CITES-listed sharks using a paper-based Lab-on-a-Chip (LOC).PloS one · 2024Article
- RESCUE: a validated Nanopore pipeline to classify bacteria through long-read, 16S-ITS-23S rRNA sequencing.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- CRISPR-KRISPR: a method to identify on-target and random insertion of donor DNAs and their characterization in knock-in mice.Genome biology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnalysis of vector integration sites in gene-modified cells can provide critical information on clonality and potential biological impact on nearby genes. Current short-read next-generation sequencing methods require specialized instruments and large batch runs.
methodsWe used nanopore sequencing to analyze the vector integration sites of T cells transduced by the gammaretroviral vector, SFG.iCasp9.2A.ΔCD19. DNA from oligoclonal cell lines and polyclonal clinical samples were restriction enzyme digested with two 6-cutters,
resultsBoth inverse PCR and cassette ligation PCR could successfully amplify flanking genomic DNA, with cassette ligation PCR showing less bias. The 4.8 million raw reads were grouped into 12,186 clusters and 6410 clones. The 3'long terminal repeat (LTR)-genome junction could be resolved within a 5-nucleotide span for a majority of clusters and within one nucleotide span for clusters with ≥5 reads. The chromosomal distributions of the insertional sites and their predilection for regions proximate to transcription start sites were consistent with previous reports for gammaretroviral vector integrants as analyzed by short-read next-generation sequencing.
conclusionOur study shows that it is feasible to use nanopore sequencing to map polyclonal vector integration sites. The assay is scalable and requires minimum capital, which together enable cost-effective and timely analysis. Further refinement is required to reduce amplification bias and improve single nucleotide resolution.
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.