Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37122471›Full record

ArticleACS central science2023

Glow-in-the-Dark Infectious Disease Diagnostics Using CRISPR-Cas9-Based Split Luciferase Complementation.

Harmen J van der Veer, Eva A van Aalen, Claire M S Michielsen, Eva T L Hanckmann, Jeroen Deckers, Marcel M G J van Borren, Jacky Flipse, Anne J M Loonen, Joost P H Schoeber, Maarten Merkx

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS central science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Point of care antimicrobial susceptibility testing.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Protein engineering: status report.Protein engineering, design & selection : PEDS · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

10 authors.

Harmen J van der VeerLaboratory of Chemical Biology, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O. Box 513, Eindhoven 5600 MB, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4359-8079
Eva A van AalenLaboratory of Chemical Biology, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O. Box 513, Eindhoven 5600 MB, The Netherlands.
Claire M S MichielsenLaboratory of Chemical Biology, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O. Box 513, Eindhoven 5600 MB, The Netherlands.
Eva T L HanckmannLaboratory of Chemical Biology, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O. Box 513, Eindhoven 5600 MB, The Netherlands.
Jeroen DeckersLaboratory of Chemical Biology, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O. Box 513, Eindhoven 5600 MB, The Netherlands.
Marcel M G J van BorrenDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, Rijnstate Hospital, P.O. Box 9555, Arnhem 6800 TA, The Netherlands.
Jacky FlipseLaboratory for Medical Microbiology and Immunology, Rijnstate Hospital, P.O. Box 8, Velp 6880 AA, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2195-5282
Anne J M LoonenResearch Group Applied Natural Sciences, Fontys University of Applied Sciences, Eindhoven 5612 AP, The Netherlands.
Joost P H SchoeberResearch Group Applied Natural Sciences, Fontys University of Applied Sciences, Eindhoven 5612 AP, The Netherlands.
Maarten MerkxLaboratory of Chemical Biology, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, P.O. Box 513, Eindhoven 5600 MB, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9484-3882

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nucleic acid detection methods based on CRISPR and isothermal amplification techniques show great potential for point-of-care diagnostic applications. However, most current methods rely on fluorescent or lateral flow assay readout, requiring external excitation or postamplification reaction transfer. Here, we developed a bioluminescent nucleic acid sensor (LUNAS) platform in which target dsDNA is sequence-specifically detected by a pair of dCas9-based probes mediating split NanoLuc luciferase complementation. LUNAS is easily integrated with recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA), providing attomolar sensitivity in a rapid one-pot assay. A calibrator luciferase is included for a robust ratiometric readout, enabling real-time monitoring of the RPA reaction using a simple digital camera. We designed an RT-RPA-LUNAS assay that allows SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection without the need for cumbersome RNA isolation and demonstrated its diagnostic performance for COVID-19 patient nasopharyngeal swab samples. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 from samples with viral RNA loads of ∼200 cp/μL was achieved within ∼20 min, showing that RPA-LUNAS is attractive for point-of-care infectious disease testing.

Identifiers

PMID37122471
PMCPMC10141630

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.