ArticleJournal of clinical pathology2021
Construction of a reference material panel for detecting
Article in Journal of clinical pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Calibration of cell-free DNA measurements by next-generation sequencing.American journal of clinical pathology · 2023Article
- Genomic and Transcriptomic Research in the Discovery and Application of Colorectal Cancer Circulating Markers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- The Overview of Perspectives of Clinical Application of Liquid Biopsy in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Prognostic Value of Circulating Tumor DNA (ctDNA) in Oncogene-Driven NSCLC: Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives.Cancers · 2022Review
- Genetic and treatment profiles of patients with concurrent Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) and Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK) mutations.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Development of a Duck Genomic Reference Material by Digital PCR Platforms for the Detection of Meat Adulteration.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe absence of high-quality next-generation sequencing (NGS) reference material (RM) has impeded the clinical use of liquid biopsies with plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in China.
objectiveThis study aimed to develop a national RM panel for external quality assessment and performance evaluation during kit registration of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)-related Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene (
methodsMutation cell lines detected by NGS and validated by Sanger sequencing were selected to establish the RM. Cell line genomic DNA was sheared and used to spike basal plasma cfDNA at 10% concentration. Then, the calibration accuracy was determined by four sequencing platforms. Average values were adopted and diluted to 0.1%, 0.3%, 1% and 3% concentrations with basal plasma as the RM panel. Then, five manufacturers were invited to evaluate the performance of the RM panel.
results20 cell lines with 23 clinically important mutations were selected, including six mutations in
conclusionRM for a
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.