Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32671501›Full record

ArticleJournal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology2020

A comparison of culture-based, real-time PCR, droplet digital PCR and flow cytometric methods for the detection of Burkholderia cepacia complex in nuclease-free water and antiseptics.

Youngbeom Ahn, Bailey Gibson, Anna Williams, Pierre Alusta, Dan A Buzatu, Yong-Jin Lee, John J LiPuma, David Hussong, Bernard Marasa, Carl E Cerniglia

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Rapid detection ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Youngbeom AhnDivision of Microbiology, National Center for Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 3900 NCTR Road, Jefferson, AR, 72079-9502, USA. young.ahn@fda.hhs.gov.
Bailey GibsonDivision of Microbiology, National Center for Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 3900 NCTR Road, Jefferson, AR, 72079-9502, USA.
Anna WilliamsDivision of Systems Biology, National Center for Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR, 72079, USA.
Pierre AlustaDivision of Systems Biology, National Center for Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR, 72079, USA.
Dan A BuzatuDivision of Systems Biology, National Center for Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR, 72079, USA.
Yong-Jin LeeDepartment of Biological Sciences, Albany State University, Albany, GA, 31705, USA.
John J LiPumaDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
David HussongEagle Analytical Services, Houston, TX, 77099, USA.
Bernard MarasaOffice of Pharmaceutical Quality, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, 20993, USA.
Carl E CernigliaDivision of Microbiology, National Center for Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 3900 NCTR Road, Jefferson, AR, 72079-9502, USA.
United States Food and Drug Administration · USNational Center for Toxicological Research · USAlbany State University · USAnalytical Services · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

Intramural FDA HHS FD999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The presence of Burkholderia cepacia complex (BCC) strains has resulted in recalls of pharmaceutical products, since these opportunistic pathogens can cause serious infections. Rapid and sensitive diagnostic methods to detect BCC are crucial to determine contamination levels. We evaluated bacterial cultures, real-time PCR (qPCR), droplet digital PCR (ddPCR), and flow cytometry to detect BCC in nuclease-free water, in chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) and benzalkonium chloride (BZK) solutions. Twenty BCC strains were each suspended (1, 10, 100, and 1000 CFU/ml) in autoclaved nuclease-free water, 10 μg/ml CHX, and 50 μg/ml BZK. Five replicates of each strain were tested at each concentration (20 strains × 4 concentrations × 5 replicates = 400 tests) to detect BCC using the aforementioned four methods. We demonstrated the potential of ddPCR and flow cytometry as more sensitive alternatives to culture-based methods to detect BCC in autoclaved nuclease-free water and antiseptics samples.

Indexed as

Burkholderia cepacia complexDrug ContaminationFlow CytometryReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionAnti-Infective Agents, LocalBenzalkonium CompoundsBiotechnologyChlorhexidineCulturePolymerase Chain ReactionWaterAnti-Infective Agents, LocalBenzalkonium CompoundsChlorhexidinechlorhexidine gluconateWaterAntisepticsBurkholderia cepacia complexDroplet digital PCRFlow cytometersNuclease-free waterReal-time PCR

Identifiers

PMID32671501
PMCPMC12423781
OpenAlexW3042728299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.