High-throughput multiplexed gene and cell doping analysis through CRISPR-Cas12a system integrated with blood direct PCR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advancements in gene and cell therapies introduce "gene and cell doping," requiring efficient and sensitive detection methods. Here, we report a high-throughput multiplexed gene and cell doping analysis (HiMDA) using CRISPR-Cas12a system integrated with blood direct polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Blood direct PCR enables simultaneous amplification of multiple exogenous genes directly from whole-blood samples. Coupled with sequence-specific DNA recognition and fluorescence reporter system, HiMDA achieves multiplexed, on-target detection of doping genes and cells. Our results demonstrate HiMDA's feasibility with only 5 microliters of blood required for the entire 90-minute process. HiMDA exhibits exceptional sensitivity, detecting as few as 2.5 copies of doping target genes from blood-four times more sensitive than current anti-doping standards-and identifying in vivo doping up to 10 days. These findings highlight HiMDA's robust high-throughput, multiplexed capabilities, satisfying the sensitivity and selectivity demands of anti-doping research. HiMDA offers a flexible solution to meet future doping detection challenges.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".