↓ Skip to main content

Comparative analysis of circulating tumor DNA stability In K3EDTA, Streck, and CellSave blood collection tubes

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Biochemistry, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
171 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
195 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparative analysis of circulating tumor DNA stability In K3EDTA, Streck, and CellSave blood collection tubes
Published in
Clinical Biochemistry, April 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2016.03.012
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qing Kang, N. Lynn Henry, Costanza Paoletti, Hui Jiang, Pankaj Vats, Arul M. Chinnaiyan, Daniel F. Hayes, Sofia D. Merajver, James M. Rae, Muneesh Tewari

Abstract

Optimal conditions for blood collection for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) are still being developed. Although both Streck and EDTA tubes are commonly used, their ability to stabilize ctDNA as a function of time and temperature post-collection has not been thoroughly studied. Additionally, the potential utility of CellSave tubes (commonly used for circulating tumor cell) for ctDNA measurements has not been studied. Blood were collected into Streck, EDTA, and CellSave tubes from ten patients with metastatic breast cancer enrolled in the MI-ONCOSEQ tumor sequencing program at the University of Michigan and kept either on ice or at room temperature until plasma isolation. Plasma was processed after 2, 6, and 48h post-collection. We used droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) to quantify plasma ctDNA and wild-type DNA for six patients who had tumor tissue mutations represented in commercially available ddPCR assays. ctDNA abundance was similar and stable for up to 6h in all tube types, and there was no effect of storage temperature on the yield for Streck and EDTA tubes. After 48h, however, one out of four patients with detectable ctDNA showed a ~50% decline in ctDNA in the EDTA tube, and three out of six patients showed a 2-3-fold increase in wild-type DNA in the EDTA tube. Streck, EDTA, and CellSave tubes showed similar performance in preserving ctDNA for up to 6h before plasma isolation. Streck and CellSave tubes more consistently stabilized ctDNA and wild-type DNA at 48h than EDTA tubes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 195 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Turkey 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Unknown 190 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 22%
Researcher 35 18%
Student > Bachelor 19 10%
Student > Master 16 8%
Other 11 6%
Other 25 13%
Unknown 47 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 57 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 37 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 11%
Engineering 9 5%
Chemistry 3 2%
Other 16 8%
Unknown 52 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 August 2023.
All research outputs
#4,572,696
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Biochemistry
#192
of 2,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,130
of 312,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Biochemistry
#3
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,317 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,587 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.