| Title |
Optical coding of fusion genes using multicolor quantum dots for prostate cancer diagnosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s138081 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hyojin Lee, Chloe Kim, Dongjin Lee, Jea Ho Park, Peter C Searson, Kwan Hyi Lee |
| Abstract |
Recent studies have found that prostate cancer expresses abnormal genetic markers including multiple types of TMPRSS2-ERG fusion genes. The expression level of different TMPRSS2-ERG fusion genes is correlated to pathologic variables of aggressive prostate cancer and disease progression. State-of-the-art methods for detection of TMPRSS2-ERG fusion genes include reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) with a detection limit of 1 fmol at urinary condition. RT-PCR is time consuming, costly, and inapplicable for multiplexing. Ability to identify multiple fusion genes in a single sample has become important for diagnostic and clinical purposes. There is a need for a sensitive diagnostic test to detect multiple TMPRSS2-ERG fusion genes for an early diagnosis and prognosis of prostate cancer. Here, we propose to develop an assay for prostate cancer diagnosis using oligonucleotide-functionalized quantum dot and magnetic microparticle for optical detection of rearranged TMPRSS2-ERG fusion genes at a low concentration in urine. We found that our assay was able to identify three different types of fusion gene with a wide detection range and detection limit of 1 fmol (almost the same level of the RT-PCR result reported). Here, we show detection of multiple TMPRSS2-ERG fusion genes using color-coded oligonucleotides in cell lysate and urine. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 32% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Researcher | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 2 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 26% |
| Unknown | 6 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 June 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#3,127
of 4,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,491
of 330,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#52
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,122 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 330,503 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.