Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 PCR efficiencies in presence and absence of spermidine

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

1st experiment Sperm. Ct ∆Ct AE (%) Effects ?
1st serial      
Control 0 20.05 ± 0.17   100  
  1 20.11 ± 0.02 0.06 96 =
  2 20.77 ± 0.17 0.72 61 -
  3 21.12 ± 0.03 1.07 48 -
  4 21.70 ± 0.32 1.65 32 -
  5 22.66 ± 0.16 2.61 16 -
  10 NA ND 0 Total inhibition
Sample 0 28.16 ± 0.85   100  
  1 25.11 ± 0.11 −3.06 831 +
  2 25.35 ± 0.03 −2.81 701 +
  3 25.73 ± 0.11 −2.44 541 +
  4 26.53 ± 0.16 −1.63 310 +
  5 28.08 ± 0.13 −0.08 106 +
  10 NA ND 0 Total inhibition
2nd serial      
Control 0 19.86 ± 0.33   100  
  0.05 19.61 ± 0.10 −0.25 119 +
  0.10 19.78 ± 0.13 −0.09 106 +
  0.50 19.87 ± 0.15 0 100 =
  1 19.91 ± 0.14 0.05 97 =
Sample 0 28.17 ± 0.26   100  
  0.05 26.63 ± 0.49 −1.54 290 +
  0.10 25.98 ± 0.11 −2.19 456 +
  0.50 25.09 ± 0.01 −3.08 843 +
  1 25.22 ± 0.11 −2.95 773 +
  1. Abbreviations: Sperm., spermidine (mM); Ct, mean of cycle threshold value ± standard deviation value; AE, amplification efficiency; NA, non amplification; ND, not determined; =, equal; −, inhibitor; +, facilitator.
  2. The amplification efficiency of the albumin gene at each spermidine concentration points was calculated using 2-ΔCt where ΔCt = (Ct with spermidine) – (Ct without spermidine). For example in the 1st study, Control DNA with 1 mM of spermidine showing a ΔCt = 0.06, we recovered 96% of the true yield (100%, ΔCt = 0).