ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2021
Development and validation of a flexible DNA extraction (PAN) method for liquid biopsy of multiple sample types.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development and validation of a flexible DNA extraction (PAN) method for liquid biopsy of multiple sample types.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLiquid biopsy is gaining increasing popularity in cancer screening and diagnosis. However, there is no relatively mature DNA isolation method or commercial kit available that is compatible with different LB sample types. This study developed a PAN-sample DNA isolation method (PAN method) for liquid biopsy samples.
methodsThe PAN method has two key steps, including biosample-specific pretreatments for various LB sample types and high concentration guanidine thiocyanate buffer for lysis and denaturation procedure. Subsequently, the performance of PAN method was validated by a series of molecular analyses.
resultsThe PAN method was used to isolate DNA from multiple sample types related to LB, including plasma, serum, saliva, nasopharyngeal swab, and stool. All purified DNA products showed good quality and high quantity. Comparison of KRAS mutation analysis using DNA purified using PAN method versus QIAamp methods showed similar efficiency. Epstein-Barr virus DNA was detected via Q-PCR using DNA purified from serum, plasma, nasopharyngeal swab, and saliva samples collected from nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients. Similarly, methylation sequencing of swab and saliva samples revealed good coverage of target region and high methylation of HLA-DPB1 gene. Finally, 16S rDNA gene sequencing of saliva, swab, and stool samples successfully defines the relative abundance of microbial communities.
conclusionsThis study developed and validated a PAN-sample DNA isolation method that can be used for different LB samples, which can be applied to molecular epidemiological research and other areas.
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.