Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34193884›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2021

Validating quantitative PCR assays for cfDNA detection without DNA extraction in exercising SLE patients.

Elmo W I Neuberger, Alexandra Brahmer, Tobias Ehlert, Katrin Kluge, Keito F A Philippi, Simone C Boedecker, Julia Weinmann-Menke, Perikles Simon

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical TrialValidation Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elmo W I NeubergerDepartment of Sports Medicine, Rehabilitation and Disease Prevention, University of Mainz, Albert-Schweitzer Str. 22, 55128, Mainz, Germany.
Alexandra BrahmerDepartment of Sports Medicine, Rehabilitation and Disease Prevention, University of Mainz, Albert-Schweitzer Str. 22, 55128, Mainz, Germany.
Tobias EhlertDepartment of Sports Medicine, Rehabilitation and Disease Prevention, University of Mainz, Albert-Schweitzer Str. 22, 55128, Mainz, Germany.
Katrin KlugeDepartment of Sports Medicine, Rehabilitation and Disease Prevention, University of Mainz, Albert-Schweitzer Str. 22, 55128, Mainz, Germany.
Keito F A PhilippiDepartment of Sports Medicine, Rehabilitation and Disease Prevention, University of Mainz, Albert-Schweitzer Str. 22, 55128, Mainz, Germany.
Simone C BoedeckerDepartment of Rheumatology and Nephrology, University Medical Center Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Julia Weinmann-MenkeDepartment of Rheumatology and Nephrology, University Medical Center Mainz, Langenbeckstr. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Perikles SimonDepartment of Sports Medicine, Rehabilitation and Disease Prevention, University of Mainz, Albert-Schweitzer Str. 22, 55128, Mainz, Germany. simonpe@uni-mainz.de.
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) has been investigated as a screening tool for many diseases. To avoid expensive and time-consuming DNA isolation, direct quantification PCR assays can be established. However, rigorous validation is required to provide reliable data in the clinical and non-clinical context. Considering the International Organization for Standardization, as well as bioanalytical method validation guidelines, we provide a comprehensive procedure to validate assays for cfDNA quantification from blood plasma without DNA isolation. A 90 and 222 bp assay was validated to study the kinetics of cfDNA after exercise in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The assays showed ultra-low limit of quantification (LOQ) with 0.47 and 0.69 ng/ml, repeatability ≤ 11.6% (95% CI 8.1-20.3), and intermediate precision ≤ 12.1% (95% CI 9.2-17.7). Incurred sample reanalysis confirmed the precision of the procedure. The additional consideration of pre-analytical factors shows that centrifugation speed and temperature do not change cfDNA concentrations. In SLE patients cfDNA increases ~ twofold after a walking exercise, normalizing after 60 min of rest. The established assays allow reliable and cost-efficient quantification of cfDNA in minute amounts of plasma in the clinical setting. Additionally, the assay can be used as a tool to determine the impact of pre-analytical factors and validate cfDNA quantity and quality of isolated samples.

Indexed as

Real-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionAdultCell-Free Nucleic AcidsFemaleHumansLupus Erythematosus, SystemicMaleMiddle AgedCell-Free Nucleic Acids

Identifiers

PMID34193884
PMCPMC8245561
OpenAlexW3174549692

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.