Literature DB >> 16516438

A comparison of five methods for extracting DNA from paucicellular clinical samples.

Leslie Cler1, Dawei Bu, Cheryl Lewis, David Euhus.   

Abstract

Translational protocols in cancer and carcinogenesis often require isolation of genomic DNA from paucicellular clinical samples. DNA extraction methods for PCR-based applications should optimize the recovery of amplifiable DNA. We compared five methods for DNA extraction in paucicellular epithelial and lymphocyte samples using proportion of extractions producing amplifiable DNA and mean real-time PCR Ct values for GAPDH as the endpoint measures. The methods included solid-phase DNA adsorption (QIAamp), sequential protein and DNA precipitation (Puregene), magnetic bead adsorption (Dynabeads), phenol-chloroform extraction, and single-step proteinase K digestion. In general, the performance of the three commercial kits was superior to either phenol-chloroform extraction or single-step proteinase K digestion. However, QIAamp and Puregene produced amplifiable DNA more frequently than Dynabeads for starting cell numbers <50,000. GAPDH Ct values for QIAamp extractions showed the greatest dynamic range and the best linearity across the range of starting cell numbers, but QIAamp was not statistically significantly superior to Puregene. Of the three commercial kits, Puregene is the least expensive. QIAamp and Puregene DNA extraction methods are well-suited for the preparation of paucicellular clinical samples for PCR-based assays.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16516438     DOI: 10.1016/j.mcp.2005.12.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Cell Probes        ISSN: 0890-8508            Impact factor:   2.365


  6 in total

1.  Microfluidic platform versus conventional real-time polymerase chain reaction for the detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae in respiratory specimens.

Authors:  Elizabeth Wulff-Burchfield; Wiley A Schell; Allen E Eckhardt; Michael G Pollack; Zhishan Hua; Jeremy L Rouse; Vamsee K Pamula; Vijay Srinivasan; Jonathan L Benton; Barbara D Alexander; David A Wilfret; Monica Kraft; Charles B Cairns; John R Perfect; Thomas G Mitchell
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 2.803

2.  Comparison of eleven methods for genomic DNA extraction suitable for large-scale whole-genome genotyping and long-term DNA banking using blood samples.

Authors:  Androniki Psifidi; Chrysostomos I Dovas; Georgios Bramis; Thomai Lazou; Claire L Russel; Georgios Arsenos; Georgios Banos
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  The effect of deoxyribonucleic acid extraction methods from lymphoid tissue on the purity, content, and amplifying ability.

Authors:  Hossein Ayatollahi; Mohammad Hadi Sadeghian; Mohammad Reza Keramati; Ali Ayatollahi; Arezoo Shajiei; Maryam Sheikhi; Samane Bakhshi
Journal:  Niger Med J       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug

4.  Influence of Magnetic Microparticles Isolation on Adenine Homonucleotides Structure.

Authors:  Monika Kremplova; Dana Fialova; Lukas Nejdl; David Hynek; Libuse Trnkova; Jaromir Hubalek; Rene Kizek; Vojtech Adam
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2014-02-25       Impact factor: 3.623

5.  Quality of DNA extracted from mouthwashes.

Authors:  Tetyana Zayats; Terri L Young; David A Mackey; François Malecaze; Patrick Calvas; Jeremy A Guggenheim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-07-07       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Development of an ammonium sulfate DNA extraction method for obtaining amplifiable DNA in a small number of cells and its application to clinical specimens.

Authors:  Seo Young Oh; Wook Youn Kim; Tae Sook Hwang; Hye Seung Han; So Dug Lim; Wan Seop Kim
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-04-17       Impact factor: 3.411

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.