1. Alcohol biomarkers
Glynnis B Ingall Clin Lab Med. 2012 Sep;32(3):391-406. doi: 10.1016/j.cll.2012.06.003. Epub 2012 Jul 13.
Excessive alcohol consumption poses a wide variety of significant immediate and long-term health risks. Ethanol biomarkers have clinical utility for detection, diagnosis, and treatment of alcohol use disorders as well as for screening for fetal alcohol exposure. Indirect biomarkers are those that reflect the toxic effects of ethanol on organs, tissues, or body biochemistry, whereas direct biomarkers are products of ethanol metabolism. Liver enzymes, carbohydrate deficient transferrin and mean corpuscular volume are discussed as examples of indirect markers of alcohol use. Commentary on the direct ethanol markers includes the following: acetaldehyde adducts, ethyl glucuronide, ethyl sulfate, phosphatidylethanol and fatty acids ethyl esters.
2. Alcohol Biomarkers in Clinical and Forensic Contexts
Hilke Andresen-Streichert, Alexander Müller, Alexander Glahn, Gisela Skopp, Martina Sterneck Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2018 May 4;115(18):309-315. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2018.0309.
Background: Biomarkers of alcohol consumption are important not only in forensic contexts, e.g., in child custody proceedings or as documentation of alcohol abstinence after temporary confiscation of a driver's license. They are increasingly being used in clinical medicine as well for verification of abstinence or to rule out the harmful use of alcohol. Methods: This review is based on pertinent publications that were retrieved by a selective literature search in PubMed concerning the direct and indirect alcohol markers discussed here, as well as on the authors' experience in laboratory analysis and clinical medicine. Results: Alongside the direct demonstration of ethanol, the available markers of alcohol consumption include the classic indirect markers carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (CDT), gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT), and mean corpuscular volume (MCV) as well as direct alcohol markers such as ethyl glucuronide (EtG) and ethyl sulfate (EtS) in serum and urine and EtG and fatty acid ethyl esters (FAEE) in hair. Phosphatidylethanol (PEth) is a promising parameter that com - plements the existing spectrum of tests with high specificity (48-89%) and sensi - tivity (88-100%). In routine clinical practice, the demonstration of positive alcohol markers often leads patients to admit previously denied alcohol use. This makes it possible to motivate the patient to undergo treatment for alcoholism. Conclusion: The available alcohol biomarkers vary in sensitivity and specificity with respect to the time period over which they indicate alcohol use and the minimum extent of alcohol use that they can detect. The appropriate marker or combination of markers should be chosen in each case according to the particular question that is to be answered by laboratory analysis.
3. Probing RNA structure in vivo
David Mitchell 3rd, Sarah M Assmann, Philip C Bevilacqua Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2019 Dec;59:151-158. doi: 10.1016/j.sbi.2019.07.008. Epub 2019 Sep 13.
RNA structure underpins many essential functions in biology. New chemical reagents and techniques for probing RNA structure in living cells have emerged in recent years. High-throughput, genome-wide techniques such as Structure-seq2 and DMS-MaPseq exploit nucleobase modification by dimethylsulfate (DMS) to obtain complete structuromes, and are applicable to multiple domains of life and conditions. New reagents such as 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)carbodiimide (EDC), glyoxal, and nicotinoyl azide (NAz) greatly expand the capabilities of nucleobase probing in cells. Additionally, ribose-targeting reagents in selective 2'-hydroxyl acylation and primer extension (SHAPE) detect RNA flexibility in vivo. These techniques, coupled with crosslinking nucleobases in psoralen analysis of RNA interactions and structures (PARIS), provide new and diverse ways to elucidate RNA secondary and tertiary structure in vivo and genome-wide.
