Skip to main content
PMC home page
Environmental Health Perspectives logoLink to Environmental Health Perspectives
. 1999 Jul;107(7):517–520. doi: 10.1289/ehp.99107517

Collection of genomic DNA by buccal swabs for polymerase chain reaction-based biomarker assays.

A H Walker 1, D Najarian 1, D L White 1, J F Jaffe 1, P A Kanetsky 1, T R Rebbeck 1
PMCID: PMC1566681  PMID: 10378997

Abstract

Studies in molecular and genetic epidemiology require a high-throughput, low cost, and reliable means of genomic DNA collection. Buccal (cheek) swabs have been proposed as a means of achieving these goals, but there is little information about the practical application of this approach. From January 1995 to December 1997, we processed 995 buccal swabs for use in polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based genotype assays in the context of ongoing molecular epidemiologic studies. Six hundred forty-seven of these swabs were processed immediately after collection and 348 were received by mail. We were able to obtain at least one genotype from 99.7% (645 of 647) of fresh-processed and 97.4% (330 of 339) of mailed biosamples. A PCR success rate of 90.3% (2,546 genotypes from 2,819 assays) was achieved. Genotypes were obtained from 96.1% (1, 865 genotypes from 1,941 assays) of fresh-processed biosamples and 77.6% (681 genotypes from 878 assays) of mailed biosamples. PCR success rates at any single locus ranged from 92.6 to 98.8% (fresh-processed) and 75.5 to 79.6% (mailed). The PCR success rate among fresh-processed biosamples was significantly higher than among mailed biosamples (Fisher's exact test p < 0.0001), and more attempts were required to obtain a successful PCR result for mailed biosamples as compared to fresh-processed biosamples. For one locus (CYP3A4), a subset of mailed biosamples was purified if two or more PCR failures occurred. Additional genotypes were obtained in 58.3% of these previously failed biosamples. Time from biosample receipt to DNA extraction had no effect on PCR success. After storage of processed biosamples for as long as 3 years, there was no appreciable decrease in the rate of PCR success. These results suggest that adequate DNA for PCR-based applications can be obtained from buccal swabs, but sampling or processing considerations may be important in obtaining optimal results.

Full text

PDF
517

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Brinkmann B., Rand S., Bajanowski T. Forensic identification of urine samples. Int J Legal Med. 1992;105(1):59–61. doi: 10.1007/BF01371242. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Davies M. H., Elias E., Acharya S., Cotton W., Faulder G. C., Fryer A. A., Strange R. C. GSTM1 null polymorphism at the glutathione S-transferase M1 locus: phenotype and genotype studies in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis. Gut. 1993 Apr;34(4):549–553. doi: 10.1136/gut.34.4.549. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Freeman B., Powell J., Ball D., Hill L., Craig I., Plomin R. DNA by mail: an inexpensive and noninvasive method for collecting DNA samples from widely dispersed populations. Behav Genet. 1997 May;27(3):251–257. doi: 10.1023/a:1025614231190. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Gasparini P., Savoia A., Pignatti P. F., Dallapiccola B., Novelli G. Amplification of DNA from epithelial cells in urine. N Engl J Med. 1989 Mar 23;320(12):809–809. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198903233201218. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Harding J. D., Gebeyehu G., Bebee R., Simms D., Klevan L. Rapid isolation of DNA from complex biological samples using a novel capture reagent--methidium-spermine-sepharose. Nucleic Acids Res. 1989 Sep 12;17(17):6947–6958. doi: 10.1093/nar/17.17.6947. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Higuchi R., von Beroldingen C. H., Sensabaugh G. F., Erlich H. A. DNA typing from single hairs. Nature. 1988 Apr 7;332(6164):543–546. doi: 10.1038/332543a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Lench N., Stanier P., Williamson R. Simple non-invasive method to obtain DNA for gene analysis. Lancet. 1988 Jun 18;1(8599):1356–1358. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(88)92178-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. McCabe E. R., Huang S. Z., Seltzer W. K., Law M. L. DNA microextraction from dried blood spots on filter paper blotters: potential applications to newborn screening. Hum Genet. 1987 Mar;75(3):213–216. doi: 10.1007/BF00281061. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Meulenbelt I., Droog S., Trommelen G. J., Boomsma D. I., Slagboom P. E. High-yield noninvasive human genomic DNA isolation method for genetic studies in geographically dispersed families and populations. Am J Hum Genet. 1995 Nov;57(5):1252–1254. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Pemble S., Schroeder K. R., Spencer S. R., Meyer D. J., Hallier E., Bolt H. M., Ketterer B., Taylor J. B. Human glutathione S-transferase theta (GSTT1): cDNA cloning and the characterization of a genetic polymorphism. Biochem J. 1994 May 15;300(Pt 1):271–276. doi: 10.1042/bj3000271. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Prinz M., Grellner W., Schmitt C. DNA typing of urine samples following several years of storage. Int J Legal Med. 1993;106(2):75–79. doi: 10.1007/BF01225044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Rebbeck T. R., Jaffe J. M., Walker A. H., Wein A. J., Malkowicz S. B. Modification of clinical presentation of prostate tumors by a novel genetic variant in CYP3A4. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998 Aug 19;90(16):1225–1229. doi: 10.1093/jnci/90.16.1225. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Richards B., Skoletsky J., Shuber A. P., Balfour R., Stern R. C., Dorkin H. L., Parad R. B., Witt D., Klinger K. W. Multiplex PCR amplification from the CFTR gene using DNA prepared from buccal brushes/swabs. Hum Mol Genet. 1993 Feb;2(2):159–163. doi: 10.1093/hmg/2.2.159. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Saiki R. K., Gelfand D. H., Stoffel S., Scharf S. J., Higuchi R., Horn G. T., Mullis K. B., Erlich H. A. Primer-directed enzymatic amplification of DNA with a thermostable DNA polymerase. Science. 1988 Jan 29;239(4839):487–491. doi: 10.1126/science.2448875. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Thomson D. M., Brown N. N., Clague A. E. Routine use of hair root or buccal swab specimens for PCR analysis: advantages over using blood. Clin Chim Acta. 1992 May 15;207(3):169–174. doi: 10.1016/0009-8981(92)90116-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Tobal K., Layton D. M., Mufti G. J. Non-invasive isolation of constitutional DNA for genetic analysis. Lancet. 1989 Nov 25;2(8674):1281–1282. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(89)91893-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. de Vries H. G., Collèe J. M., van Veldhuizen M. H., Achterhof L., Smit Sibinga C. T., Scheffer H., Buys C. H., ten Kate L. P. Validation of the determination of deltaF508 mutations of the cystic fibrosis gene in over 11 000 mouthwashes. Hum Genet. 1996 Mar;97(3):334–336. doi: 10.1007/BF02185766. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Environmental Health Perspectives are provided here courtesy of National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

RESOURCES