Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35571783›Full record

ReviewACS omega2022

XNAs: A Troubleshooter for Nucleic Acid Sensing.

Tanushree Mana, Budhaditya Bhattacharya, Hiya Lahiri, Rupa Mukhopadhyay

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ACS omega, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Thermophilic Nucleic Acid Polymerases and Their Application in Xenobiology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  8. 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

4 authors.

Tanushree ManaSchool of Biological Sciences, Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science, Jadavpur, Kolkata 700032, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5511-5206
Budhaditya BhattacharyaSchool of Biological Sciences, Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science, Jadavpur, Kolkata 700032, India.
Hiya LahiriSchool of Biological Sciences, Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science, Jadavpur, Kolkata 700032, India.
Rupa MukhopadhyaySchool of Biological Sciences, Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science, Jadavpur, Kolkata 700032, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6753-079X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The strategies for nucleic acid sensing based on nucleic acid hybridization between the target sequence and the capture probe sequence are considered to be largely successful as far as detection of a specific target of known sequence is concerned. However, when compared with other complementary methods, like direct sequencing, a number of results are still found to be either "false positives" or "false negatives". This suggests that modifications in these strategies are necessary to make them more accurate. In this minireview, we propose that one way toward improvement could be replacement of the DNA capture probes with the xeno nucleic acid or XNA capture probes. This is because the XNAs, especially the locked nucleic acid, the peptide nucleic acid, and the morpholino, have shown better single nucleobase mismatch discrimination capacity than the DNA capture probes, indicating their capacity for more precise detection of nucleic acid sequences, which is beneficial for detection of gene stretches having point mutations. Keeping the current trend in mind, this minireview will include the recent developments in nanoscale, fluorescent label-free applications, and present the cases where the XNA probes show clear advantages over the DNA probes.

Identifiers

PMID35571783
PMCPMC9096816

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.