Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35763697›Full record

ArticleEpigenetics2022

Evaluating DNA recovery efficiency following bisulphite modification from plasma samples submitted for cell-free DNA methylation analysis.

Daniel Ra Cox, Boris Ka Leong Wong, Eunice Lee, Adam Testro, Vijayaragavan Muralidharan, Alexander Dobrovic, Su Kah Goh

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epigenetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 51% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Daniel Ra CoxDepartment of Surgery (Austin Precinct), The University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5092-4370
Boris Ka Leong WongTranslational Genomics and Epigenomics Laboratory, Department of Surgery (Austin Precinct), The University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Australia.
Eunice LeeDepartment of Surgery (Austin Precinct), The University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Australia.
Adam TestroLiver Transplant Unit, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia.
Vijayaragavan MuralidharanDepartment of Surgery (Austin Precinct), The University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Australia.
Alexander DobrovicDepartment of Surgery (Austin Precinct), The University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Australia.
Su Kah GohDepartment of Surgery (Austin Precinct), The University of Melbourne, Heidelberg, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6684-2521
The University of Melbourne · AUAustin Health · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The detection of methylated templates in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is increasingly recognized as a valuable, non-invasive tool for diagnosis, monitoring and prognostication in a range of medical contexts. The importance of controlling pre-analytical conditions in laboratory workflows prior to cfDNA quantification is well-established. Significant variations in the recovery of DNA following processes such as cfDNA extraction and sodium bisulphite modification may confound downstream analysis, particularly when accurate quantification of templates is required. Given the wealth of potential applications for this emerging molecular technology, attention has turned to the requirement to recognize and minimize pre-analytical variables prior to cfDNA methylation analysis. We recently described the development of an approach using an exogenous DNA construct to evaluate the recovery efficiency of cfDNA following the extraction and bisulphite modification steps (CEREBIS). Here, we report our experience in the practical application of this technique in 107 consecutive patient plasma samples submitted for quantitative cfDNA methylation analysis. The mean recovery of cfDNA (as estimated using cerebis), following extraction and bisulphite modification, was 37% ± 7%. Nine (8.4%) of the 107 samples were found to be outside of control limits, where the recovery of cerebis indicated significant differences in the efficiency of the pre-analytical processing of these samples. Recognition of these out-of-control samples precluded subsequent molecular analysis. Implementation of data-driven quality control measures, such as the one described, has the potential to improve the quality of liquid biopsy methylation analysis, interpretation and reporting.

Indexed as

Cell-Free Nucleic AcidsDNA MethylationDNAHumansLiquid BiopsySulfitesCell-Free Nucleic AcidsDNAhydrogen sulfiteSulfitescell-free DNAdigital PCRDNA controlsDNA methylationpre-analyticalquality control

Identifiers

PMID35763697
PMCPMC9665124
OpenAlexW4283711002

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.