American journal of veterinary research · 2026
Establishing a standardized biorepository across 3 clinical and translational science center-affiliated veterinary institutions is feasible and productive.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Crawford LaTasha K, Church Molly E, Boudreaux K A, Lapin J N, Hahn Lauryn A, Solis Leslie J, Wilson Rachael, Zetterberg Henrik, Catacci Guimaraes Fernanda, Shen Sam, Toedebusch Ryan G, Vernau Karen, Dupanloup Adrien, Panek Wojciech, Cameron Starr, Toedebusch Christine M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To assess faculty interest in veterinary biospecimens, develop a standardized multi-institutional biological fluid repository across 3 veterinary institutions, and assess quality and fitness for purpose of archived samples.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective multi-institutional biobanking and feasibility study from 2022 through 2025. Faculty from each institution were administered a voluntary and anonymous survey via email, and responses were recorded. Biological fluid specimens were collected and archived from the Neurology and Neurosurgery Services of each participating institution. A shared database (Freezerworks) was utilized by all 3 institutions to annotate each sample with clinical data and record the storage location. Selected serum (n = 12), CSF (n = 12), and urine (n = 9) samples were assessed for quality control and fitness for purpose by measuring concentrations of putative biomarkers via ELISAs and single-molecule array, respectively.
RESULTS: Faculty surveys indicated widespread support for centralized institutional biobanking, with 94 of 170 respondents (55%) in favor of a combination of institutional and investigator financial support. Over 2,500 biological specimens from dogs and cats with neurological disease were collected during the 3-year study period. Sample quality across serum, urine, and CSF was consistent across institutions. Moreover, serum samples from randomly selected dogs with divergent diagnoses yielded robust and discriminatory concentrations of putative neurodegenerative disease proteins.
CONCLUSIONS: Multi-institutional veterinary biobanking is feasible and productive, providing investigators with access to clinically annotated, high-quality biospecimens.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A common repository registry, wherein investigators have reciprocal access to standardized biospecimens, will connect investigators from all domains to promote rigorous, well-powered multicenter studies.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective multi-institutional biobanking and feasibility study from 2022 through 2025. Faculty from each institution were administered a voluntary and anonymous survey via email, and responses were recorded. Biological fluid specimens were collected and archived from the Neurology and Neurosurgery Services of each participating institution. A shared database (Freezerworks) was utilized by all 3 institutions to annotate each sample with clinical data and record the storage location. Selected serum (n = 12), CSF (n = 12), and urine (n = 9) samples were assessed for quality control and fitness for purpose by measuring concentrations of putative biomarkers via ELISAs and single-molecule array, respectively.
RESULTS: Faculty surveys indicated widespread support for centralized institutional biobanking, with 94 of 170 respondents (55%) in favor of a combination of institutional and investigator financial support. Over 2,500 biological specimens from dogs and cats with neurological disease were collected during the 3-year study period. Sample quality across serum, urine, and CSF was consistent across institutions. Moreover, serum samples from randomly selected dogs with divergent diagnoses yielded robust and discriminatory concentrations of putative neurodegenerative disease proteins.
CONCLUSIONS: Multi-institutional veterinary biobanking is feasible and productive, providing investigators with access to clinically annotated, high-quality biospecimens.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A common repository registry, wherein investigators have reciprocal access to standardized biospecimens, will connect investigators from all domains to promote rigorous, well-powered multicenter studies.