ArticleMolecular biology reports2026
A cost-effective and rapid TE-based DNA extraction for near point-of-care detection of Babesia spp. by RPA/CRISPR-Cas12a.
Article in Molecular biology reports, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBabesia spp. infects a wide range of mammals, including domestic animals, wildlife, and humans, highlighting the need for rapid diagnostics. This study developed a near point-of-care method combining rapid DNA extraction, recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA), and CRISPR-Cas12a for Babesia detection. METHODS AND
resultsThe workflow includes three steps: DNA extraction, RPA amplification, and CRISPR-Cas12a signal detection. Five blood DNA extraction methods were evaluated: DNeasy kit, boiling, Tris-EDTA (TE) buffer, methanol-based, and Chelex®100. The commercial kit, boiling method, and TE buffer extraction yielded positive results using RPA/CRISPR-Cas12a based on the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) gene. The TE buffer extraction and boiling methods were further optimized by RPA/CRISPR-Cas12a assay using Babesia-specific primers based on the 18S rRNA gene. All these extraction methods produced results comparable to the commercial kit. The TE buffer extraction was selected due to its simplicity and speed. The RPA/CRISPR-Cas12a assay specifically detected Babesia spp., including B. vogeli, B. gibsoni, and B. ovata. The limit of detection using TE-extracted DNA was 104 copies per reaction, lower than that achieved with the commercial kit (103 copies per reaction). Evaluation of rapid DNA extraction for Babesia spp. detection by the RPA/CRISPR-Cas12a assay using seven bovine and eight canine blood samples showed complete concordance between the TE buffer extraction and the commercial kit, with six positive samples detected.
conclusionsThe TE buffer extraction offered a low-cost, simple, and equipment-minimal approach suitable for combination with RPA/CRISPR-Cas12a diagnostics, enabling rapid detection of Babesia spp. in resource-limited or field settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42704380What 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.