ArticleBMC genomics2026
Evaluation of DNA extraction methods from clinical Mycobacterium tuberculosis primary liquid culture for whole-genome sequencing.
Article in BMC genomics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) has potential for determining the complete drug-resistance profile of clinical Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) strains. Cetyltrimethylammonium-bromide (CTAB), the conventional method for Mtb DNA extraction, is labour-intensive and difficult to implement in routine laboratory settings. This study evaluated the performance of commercial kits to extract DNA from clinical primary liquid cultures (CPC). Mtb-positive decontaminated sputum sediments were pooled and used to inoculate mycobacteria-growth-indicator tubes (MGIT). Positive non-contaminated MGIT cultures were pooled and aliquoted to generate 10 technical replicate isolates for DNA extraction by CTAB method with (+) or without (-) RNAse and nine DNA extraction commercial kits (+/-modifications): Zymo-DNA Clean and Concentrator, Zymo-Quick-DNA Fungal/Bacterial (+ lysozyme-digestion), InstaGene (IGM) +/-RiboLyser Homogeniser (RH), GenoLyse (+/-precipitation), FluoroLyse (+/-precipitation), PrepGEM-Bacterial (+/-precipitation), NucleoSpin-Tissue, NucleoMag-Pathogen, and Gene-Xpert buffer (+ precipitation or +purification). Genomic libraries for WGS were generated using the Illumina DNA-Prep Kit and evaluated for quality using NanoDrop, Qubit DNA ds/HS and TapeStation assays. Ten performance parameters were evaluated out of a score of 5: quantity of total dsDNA, DNA purity ratio A260/280 and A260/230, PCR amplifiability (targeting the pncA gene, 615 bp), concentration of genomic libraries (ng/µl), library fragment size (bp), mapped percentage, median coverage, turnaround time and cost. IGM/RH showed the highest overall performance, followed by IGM, CTAB/RNase, GenoLyse+precipitation, and FluoroLyse+precipitation. Commercial methods achieved sequencing results comparable to CTAB while requiring shorter processing times and lower costs. Simplified commercial extraction methods can produce DNA suitable for WGS from CPC samples while reducing processing time and cost compared with CTAB, supporting their use in routine TB workflows.
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.