ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology1998
Algorithmic approach to high-throughput molecular screening for alpha interferon-resistant genotypes in hepatitis C patients.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 1998. 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, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Most common genotypes and risk factors for HCV in Gaza strip: a cross sectional study.Virology journal · 2009Article
- Vertical transmission of Chlamydia trachomatis in Chongqing China.Current microbiology · 2009Article
- Genotyping of hepatitis C virus types 1, 2, 3, and 4 by a one-step LightCycler method using three different pairs of hybridization probes.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2002Article
- Detection of germline BRCA1 mutations by Multiple-Dye Cleavase Fragment Length Polymorphism (MD-CFLP) method.British journal of cancer · 2001Article
- Principles and applications of methods for DNA-based typing of microbial organisms.Journal of clinical microbiology · 1999Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study was designed to analyze the feasibility and validity of using Cleavase Fragment Length Polymorphism (CFLP) analysis as an alternative to DNA sequencing for high-throughput screening of hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes in a high-volume molecular pathology laboratory setting. By using a 244-bp amplicon from the 5' untranslated region of the HCV genome, 61 clinical samples received for HCV reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) were genotyped by this method. The genotype frequencies assigned by the CFLP method were 44.3% for type 1a, 26.2% for 1b, 13.1% for type 2b, and 5% type 3a. The results obtained by nucleotide sequence analysis provided 100% concordance with those obtained by CFLP analysis at the major genotype level, with resolvable differences as to subtype designations for five samples. CFLP analysis-derived HCV genotype frequencies also concurred with the national estimates (N. N. Zein et al., Ann. Intern. Med. 125:634-639, 1996). Reanalysis of 42 of these samples in parallel in a different research laboratory reproduced the CFLP fingerprints for 100% of the samples. Similarly, the major subtype designations for 19 samples subjected to different incubation temperature-time conditions were also 100% reproducible. Comparative cost analysis for genotyping of HCV by line probe assay, CFLP analysis, and automated DNA sequencing indicated that the average cost per amplicon was lowest for CFLP analysis, at $20 (direct costs). On the basis of these findings we propose that CFLP analysis is a robust, sensitive, specific, and an economical method for large-scale screening of HCV-infected patients for alpha interferon-resistant HCV genotypes. The paper describes an algorithm that uses as a reflex test the RT-PCR-based qualitative screening of samples for HCV detection and also addresses genotypes that are ambiguous.
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.