ArticleThe AAPS journal2026
Impact of Extraction Recovery and Matrix Effect on qPCR-based Biodistribution Analysis in Gene Therapy: Strategies for Mitigation.
Article in The AAPS journal, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In DNA biodistribution studies, genomic DNA (gDNA) is commonly used as a normalizer for quantifying vector DNA (vDNA) to account for multiple variations including tissue type, sample input, DNA extraction efficiency, etc. Typically, the concentrations of both vDNA and gDNA in elution buffer after extraction are interpolated from standard curves prepared in neat solution, and the derived vector genome per diploid genome (vg/dg) ratio is reported to represent the relative amount of delivered vDNA in tissues. However, the accuracy of this interpolated vg/dg relies on the assumption that vDNA and gDNA have equal extraction efficiencies and are similarly affected by the tissue matrix during qPCR quantification. Despite its widespread use operationally, this assumption has yet to be scientifically examined. In this work, we tested this assumption by co-spiking vDNA and gDNA into the same tissue samples, then conducting DNA extraction and qPCR analysis to compare their extraction recovery and matrix effect. Our results revealed that vDNA and gDNA exhibit differential recovery even from the same sample and are affected differently by the tissue matrix. Consequently, this leads to bias in the interpolation of sample vg/dg values. We proposed and developed two strategies to mitigate the impact of recovery and matrix effect on DNA biodistribution studies: (1) using a matching matrix curve that closely resembles the study samples, and (2) optimizing the DNA extraction protocol to minimize the recovery and matrix effect differences. These strategies have been successfully applied to multiple biodistribution studies. We believe these findings provide valuable insights that enhance the accuracy and reliability of DNA biodistribution analysis in gene therapy research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42760432What 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.