Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32571390›Full record

ArticleClinical epigenetics2020

Comprehensive evaluation of targeted multiplex bisulphite PCR sequencing for validation of DNA methylation biomarker panels.

Dilys Lam, Phuc-Loi Luu, Jenny Z Song, Wenjia Qu, Gail P Risbridger, Mitchell G Lawrence, Jennifer Lu, Matt Trau, Darren Korbie, Susan J Clark and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical epigenetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Epigenomic insights into common human disease pathology.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Dilys LamEpigenetics Research Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, 2010, Australia.
Phuc-Loi LuuEpigenetics Research Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, 2010, Australia.
Jenny Z SongEpigenetics Research Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, 2010, Australia.
Wenjia QuEpigenetics Research Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, 2010, Australia.
Gail P RisbridgerMonash Partners Comprehensive Cancer Consortium, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute Cancer Program, Prostate Cancer Research Group, Department of Anatomy and Developmental Biology, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, 3800, Australia.
Mitchell G LawrenceMonash Partners Comprehensive Cancer Consortium, Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute Cancer Program, Prostate Cancer Research Group, Department of Anatomy and Developmental Biology, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, 3800, Australia.
Jennifer LuCentre for Personalised Nanomedicine, Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, 4072, Australia.
Matt TrauCentre for Personalised Nanomedicine, Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, 4072, Australia.
Darren KorbieCentre for Personalised Nanomedicine, Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (AIBN), The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, 4072, Australia.
Susan J ClarkEpigenetics Research Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, 2010, Australia.
Ruth PidsleyEpigenetics Research Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, 2010, Australia. r.pidsley@garvan.org.au.
Clare StirzakerEpigenetics Research Laboratory, Genomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, 2010, Australia. c.stirzaker@garvan.org.au.ORCID 0000-0001-5601-3140
Garvan Institute of Medical Research · AUThe University of Queensland · AUThe University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDNA methylation is a well-studied epigenetic mark that is frequently altered in diseases such as cancer, where specific changes are known to reflect the type and severity of the disease. Therefore, there is a growing interest in assessing the clinical utility of DNA methylation as a biomarker for diagnosing disease and guiding treatment. The development of an accurate loci-specific methylation assay, suitable for use on low-input clinical material, is crucial for advancing DNA methylation biomarkers into a clinical setting. A targeted multiplex bisulphite PCR sequencing approach meets these needs by allowing multiple DNA methylated regions to be interrogated simultaneously in one experiment on limited clinical material.

resultsHere, we provide an updated protocol and recommendations for multiplex bisulphite PCR sequencing (MBPS) assays for target DNA methylation analysis. We describe additional steps to improve performance and reliability: (1) pre-sequencing PCR optimisation which includes assessing the optimal PCR cycling temperature and primer concentration and (2) post-sequencing PCR optimisation to achieve uniform coverage of each amplicon. We use a gradient of methylated controls to demonstrate how PCR bias can be assessed and corrected. Methylated controls also allow assessment of the sensitivity of methylation detection for each amplicon. Here, we show that the MBPS assay can amplify as little as 0.625 ng starting DNA and can detect methylation differences of 1% with a sequencing coverage of 1000 reads. Furthermore, the multiplex bisulphite PCR assay can comprehensively interrogate multiple regions on 1-5 ng of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded DNA or circulating cell-free DNA.

conclusionsThe MBPS assay is a valuable approach for assessing methylated DNA regions in clinical samples with limited material. The optimisation and additional quality control steps described here improve the performance and reliability of this method, advancing it towards potential clinical applications in biomarker studies.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationCell Line, TumorCpG IslandsEarly Detection of CancerEpigenesis, GeneticGenetic MarkersHumansMaleMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionProstatic NeoplasmsSample SizeSensitivity and SpecificityWhole Genome SequencingGenetic MarkersBisulphite amplicon sequencingClinical biomarkersDNA methylationEpigeneticsMethylomeMultiplex

Identifiers

PMID32571390
PMCPMC7310104
OpenAlexW3036142415

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.