↓ Skip to main content

Improved amplification efficiency on stool samples by addition of spermidine and its use for non-invasive detection of colorectal cancer

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Biotechnology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Improved amplification efficiency on stool samples by addition of spermidine and its use for non-invasive detection of colorectal cancer
Published in
BMC Biotechnology, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12896-015-0148-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-Pierre Roperch, Karim Benzekri, Hicham Mansour, Roberto Incitti

Abstract

Using quantitative methylation-specific PCR (QM-MSP) is a promising method for colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis from stool samples. Difficulty in eliminating PCR inhibitors of this body fluid has been extensively reported. Here, spermidine is presented as PCR facilitator for the detection of stool DNA methylation biomarkers using QM-MSP. We examined its effectiveness with NPY, PENK and WIF1, three biomarkers which we have previously shown to be of relevance to CRC. We determined an optimal window for the amplification of the albumin (Alb) gene (100 ng of bisulfite-treated stool DNA added of 1 mM spermidine) at which we report that spermidine acts as a PCR facilitator (AE = 1680%) for SG RT-PCR. We show that the amplification of methylated PENK, NPY and WIF1 is considerably facilitated by QM-MSP as measured by an increase of CMI (Cumulative Methylation Index, i.e. the sum of the three methylation values) by a factor of 1.5 to 23 fold in individual samples, and of 10 fold in a pool of five samples. We contend that spermidine greatly reduces the problems of PCR inhibition in stool samples. This observed feature, after validation on a larger sampling, could be used in the development of stool-based CRC diagnosis tests.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 3%
Unknown 28 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Lecturer 1 3%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 9 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Engineering 2 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 11 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 14 May 2020.
All research outputs
#6,418,622
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from BMC Biotechnology
#361
of 935 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,219
of 265,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Biotechnology
#28
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 935 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 265,918 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.