ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2023
SNP analysis of challenging bone DNA samples using the HID-Ion AmpliSeq™ Identity Panel: facts and artefacts.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Autosomal STR Markers for Forensic Genetics: Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions.Genes · 2026Review
- Review
- Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
PCR-MPS is an emerging tool for the analysis of low-quality DNA samples. In this study, we used PCR-MPS to analyse 32 challenging bone DNA samples from three Second World War victims, which previously yielded no results in conventional STR PCR-CE typing. The Identity Panel was used with 27 cycles of PCR. Despite that we only had an average of 6.8 pg of degraded DNA as template, 30 out of 32 libraries (93.8%) produced sequencing data for about 63/90 autosomal markers per sample. Out of the 30 libraries, 14 (46.7%) yielded single source genetic profiles in agreement with the biological identity of the donor, whereas 12 cases (40.0%) resulted in SNP profiles that did not match or were mixed. The misleading outcomes for those 12 cases were likely due to hidden exogenous human contamination, as shown by the higher frequencies of allelic imbalance, unusual high frequencies of allelic drop-ins, high heterozygosity levels in the consensus profiles generated from challenging samples, and traces of amplified molecular products in four out of eight extraction negative controls. Even if the source and the time of the contamination were not identified, it is likely that it occurred along the multi-step bone processing workflow. Our results suggest that only positive identification by statistical tools (e.g. likelihood ratio) should be accepted as reliable; oppositely, the results leading to exclusion should be treated as inconclusive because of potential contamination issues. Finally, strategies are discussed for monitoring the workflow of extremely challenging bone samples in PCR-MPS experiments with an increased number of PCR cycles.
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.