Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Published in Association with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)

Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario

Ed. by Gillery, Philippe / Lackner, Karl J. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Melichar, Bohuslav / Payne, Deborah A. / Schlattmann, Peter / Tate, Jillian R.

IMPACT FACTOR increased in 2015: 3.017
Rank 5 out of 30 in category Medical Laboratory Technology in the 2014 Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report/Science Edition

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.873
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.982
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 2.238

249,00 € / $374.00 / £187.00*

See all formats and pricing


Select Volume and Issue


Comparison of Standard PCR and the LightCycler® Technique to Determine the Thrombophilic Mutations: An Efficiency and Cost Study

Brigitte Schroell-Metzger / Mario Dicato / Manon Bosseler / Guy Berchem

Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Volume 41, Issue 4, Pages 482–485, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.2003.072, June 2005

Publication History

Published Online:


For several years it has been possible to routinely detect numerous mutations in the human genome by different methods. The most common technique is a standard PCR, but real time fluorescence PCR is increasingly being used. The purpose of this paper is to compare these two different techniques from the point of view of reliability, time consumption, and cost. More than 600 DNA samples of prevalence studies and from cancer patients were used to determine mutations in the genes of coagulation factor V Leiden, prothrombin, and methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase using standard PCR. A subset of 132 samples from the same pool was also tested by LightCycler PCR for the same coagulation gene mutations. Originally LightCycler techniques were applied for quantitative PCR by real time fluorescence measuring. Adding a melting curve analysis allows mutation detection. The results were perfectly concordant. The cost for the reagents is nearly the same for both methods but the time consumption for standard PCR is much higher than for the LightCycler method, resulting in higher laboratory personnel costs.

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

Neil J. Gibson
Clinica Chimica Acta, 2006, Volume 363, Number 1-2, Page 32
David Gancberg, Philippe Corbisier, Nele Meeus, Janos Marki-Zay, Christine Mannhalter, and Heinz Schimmel
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 2008, Volume 46, Number 4
Ashkan Emadi, Matthew T. Crim, Daniel J. Brotman, Alejandro J. Necochea, Lipika Samal, Lisa M. Wilson, Eric B. Bass, and Jodi B. Segal
American Journal of Hematology, 2010, Volume 85, Number 4, Page 264
Bo Xu, Raymond R Tubbs, and Kandice Kottke-Marchant
Diagnostic Molecular Pathology, 2005, Volume 14, Number 4, Page 193

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.