Exploring the potential of genetic analysis in historical blood spots for patients with iodine-deficient goiter and thyroid carcinomas in Switzerland and Germany (1929-1989).

Iodine deficiency-induced goiter continues to be a global public health concern, with varying manifestations based on geography, patient's age, and sex. To gain insights into clinical occurrences, a retrospective study analyzed medical records from patients with iodine deficiency-induced goiter or thyroid cancer who underwent surgery at the Community Hospital in Riehen, Switzerland, between 1929 and 1989. Despite today's adequate iodine supplementation, a significant risk for iodine-independent goiter remains in Switzerland, suggesting that genetic factors, among others, might be involved. Thus, a pilot study exploring the feasibility of genetic analysis of blood spots from these medical records was conducted to investigate and enhance the understanding of goiter development, potentially identify genetic variations, and explore the influence of dietary habits and other environmental stimuli on the disease.Blood prints from goiter patients' enlarged organs were collected per decade from medical records. These prints had been made by pressing, drawing, or tracing (i.e., pressed and drawn) the removed organs onto paper sheets. DNA analysis revealed that its yields varied more between the prints than between years. A considerable proportion of the samples exhibited substantial DNA degradation unrelated to sample collection time and DNA mixtures of different contributors. Thus, each goiter imprint must be individually evaluated and cannot be used to predict the success rate of genetic analysis in general. Collecting a large sample or the entire blood ablation for genetic analysis is recommended to mitigate potential insufficient DNA quantities. Researchers should also consider degradation and external biological compounds' impact on the genetic analysis of interest, with the dominant contributor anticipated to originate from the patient's blood.

Collecting touch DNA from glass surfaces using different sampling solutions and volumes: Immediate and storage effects on genetic STR analysis.

Touch DNA has become increasingly important evidence in todays' forensic casework. However, due to its invisible nature and typically minute amounts of DNA, the collection of biological material from touched objects remains a particular challenge that underscores the importance of the best collection methods for maximum recovery efficiency. So far, swabs moistened with water are often utilized in forensic crime scene investigations for touch DNA sampling, even though an aqueous solution provokes osmosis, endangering the cell's integrity. The aim of the research presented here was to systematically determine whether DNA recovery from touched glass items can be significantly increased by varying swabbing solutions and volumes compared with water-moistened swabs and dry swabbing. A second objective was to investigate the possible effects of storage of swab solutions prior to genetic analysis on DNA yield and profile quality when stored for 3 and 12 months, as is often the case with crime scene samples. Overall, the results indicate that adapting volumes of the sampling solutions had no significant effect on DNA yield, while the detergent-based solutions performed better than water and dry removal, with the SDS reagent yielding statistically significant results. Further, stored samples showed an increase in degradation indices for all solutions tested, but no deterioration in DNA content and profile quality, allowing for unrestricted processing of touch DNA samples stored for at least 12 months. One further finding was a strong intraindividual change in DNA amounts observed over the 23 deposition days which may be related to the donor's menstrual cycle.

The DNA-Buster: The evaluation of an alternative DNA recovery approach.

Touch DNA recovery techniques can have limitations, as their effectiveness depends on the substrate on which the DNA of a person of interest can be found. In this study, an in-house dry-vacuuming device, the DNA-Buster, was compared to traditional methods for its DNA recovery performance from items typically examined in forensic casework. The aim was to evaluate whether this dry-vacuuming approach can recover DNA efficiently, potentially complementing the well-established recovery strategies. For this, the performances of swabbing, taping, wet- (M-Vac®) and dry-vacuuming (DNA-Buster) were investigated quantitatively and qualitatively for touch DNA deposited on carpet, cotton sweater, stone, tile and wood. For the sweater, both vacuuming methods outperformed the other collection tools quantitatively. While the highest DNA amounts for the carpet were yielded by swabbing and taping, dry-vacuuming was equally good in reaching full DNA profiles, whereas less complete profiles were observed for the M-Vac®. For stone and tile, swabbing was optimal, whereas dry-vacuuming clearly underperformed for these substrates. Taping was the best recovery method for wood. Despite applying single donor DNA after thoroughly cleaning the items, undesired DNA mixtures were detected for all recovery techniques and all substrates. The overall research findings show first that the novel dry-vacuuming method is suited for DNA recovery from textiles. Secondly, they indicate that more attention should be paid to the substrate-collection dependency to ensure best practices in recovering genetic material in a precise, confident and targeted manner from the variety of forensic casework material.

Collaborative swab performance comparison and the impact of sampling solution volumes on DNA recovery.

The collection of DNA traces marks the first step determining the success of genetic analysis. This study aimed to identify and validate a suitable alternative to the currently used ForensiX Evidence Collection Kit containing a cardboard box for swab storage. This box has to be folded at the crime scene, which is time-consuming and carries the risk of potential contamination and handling difficulties. A collaboration study involving three police departments and one laboratory for forensic genetics was performed to compare the currently used swab against three challenger swabs: ForensiX SafeDry, Copan 4N6FLOQSwab™ Genetics and Copan 4N6FLOQSwab™ Crime Scene. Mock samples consisted mainly of touch DNA, but also blood, saliva and semen were applied to twelve items with different surfaces. Every organisation contributed with three DNA collectors, whose individual collection efficiencies were investigated. The challenge of preparing homogenous traces, especially touch DNA, was addressed by enhancing hand contact frequency and sampling area. As a further part of the swab comparison study, we describe for the first time the influence of different swabbing solution volumes on the sampling efficiency of the different swabs. The application of touch DNA was also tested for a further swab type, the Sarstedt Forensic Swab, which yielded such low DNA concentrations that it was excluded from the collaboration study. The Copan Genetics and Copan Crime Scene swabs yielded significantly lower DNA concentrations than the currently used ForensiX Evidence Collection Kit and ForensiX SafeDry swab. The inter-individual performance results of the operators revealed significant differences in sampling skills. Comparing different swabbing solution volumes showed higher DNA yields or no significant difference for the ForensiX Evidence Collection Kit and ForensiX SafeDry than the Copan Genetics, depending on the item or trace type swabbed. Our results highlight the importance of validating first-step components that are decisive to the success of DNA typing in the context of specific sampling procedures and laboratory methods. Also, the significance of individuals' securing variations, principally unknown for crime scene investigation and laboratory teams, is emphasised for the first time, offering a practical approach for improving and training DNA collecting activities and ensuring the optimal securing evidence process. These findings increase the knowledge of impacts on DNA collection and, thus, benefit other laboratories and forensic services, particularly when using the same extraction methods.