Saliva Biobanking: A Scoping Review of Collection, Processing, and Storage Practices to Enhance Diagnostic Potential.

IF 1.4 4区 生物学
Manuela da Silva Spinola, Danielle Viana Ribeiro, Giulia Beletato Nery, David D Fischer, Nailê Damé-Teixeira, Débora Heller
{"title":"Saliva Biobanking: A Scoping Review of Collection, Processing, and Storage Practices to Enhance Diagnostic Potential.","authors":"Manuela da Silva Spinola, Danielle Viana Ribeiro, Giulia Beletato Nery, David D Fischer, Nailê Damé-Teixeira, Débora Heller","doi":"10.1089/bio.2025.0043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Objectives:</i></b> This study aimed to systematically map the literature on saliva collection, processing, and storage methods for biobanking purposes, identifying current practices and gaps in standardization. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> A systematic search was conducted in five electronic databases and gray literature. Original research articles reporting cross-sectional and longitudinal studies using saliva for biobanking, as well as reports and protocols for biobank establishment, were included. The review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, with two reviewers independently assessing eligibility and extracting data. <b><i>Results:</i></b> A total of 50 articles were included, revealing that most studies were reports on biobank establishment (38%), followed by longitudinal studies (28%), protocols (20%), and cross-sectional studies (14%). Saliva collection methods varied, with commercial kits being the most reported (40%), followed by sterile tubes (22%). While 64% of studies described processing methods and 78% reported storage methods, significant gaps in reporting were noted. Unstimulated saliva was the most commonly collected sample type (38%), and most studies focused on adult participants (46%), often with disease conditions (36%). However, many studies did not provide sufficient details on collection methods, processing techniques, storage conditions, or participant demographics. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> This review highlights the urgent need for standardized protocols in saliva biobanking to ensure consistency, reliability, and reproducibility in diagnostic research. The lack of uniformity in methodologies across studies limits the potential of saliva biobanks as a resource for identifying biomarkers of systemic and oral diseases. Establishing harmonized guidelines will enhance international collaboration, enable robust analyses, and maximize the utility of saliva in advancing personalized medicine and public health.</p>","PeriodicalId":55358,"journal":{"name":"Biopreservation and Biobanking","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biopreservation and Biobanking","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/bio.2025.0043","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to systematically map the literature on saliva collection, processing, and storage methods for biobanking purposes, identifying current practices and gaps in standardization. Materials and Methods: A systematic search was conducted in five electronic databases and gray literature. Original research articles reporting cross-sectional and longitudinal studies using saliva for biobanking, as well as reports and protocols for biobank establishment, were included. The review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, with two reviewers independently assessing eligibility and extracting data. Results: A total of 50 articles were included, revealing that most studies were reports on biobank establishment (38%), followed by longitudinal studies (28%), protocols (20%), and cross-sectional studies (14%). Saliva collection methods varied, with commercial kits being the most reported (40%), followed by sterile tubes (22%). While 64% of studies described processing methods and 78% reported storage methods, significant gaps in reporting were noted. Unstimulated saliva was the most commonly collected sample type (38%), and most studies focused on adult participants (46%), often with disease conditions (36%). However, many studies did not provide sufficient details on collection methods, processing techniques, storage conditions, or participant demographics. Conclusion: This review highlights the urgent need for standardized protocols in saliva biobanking to ensure consistency, reliability, and reproducibility in diagnostic research. The lack of uniformity in methodologies across studies limits the potential of saliva biobanks as a resource for identifying biomarkers of systemic and oral diseases. Establishing harmonized guidelines will enhance international collaboration, enable robust analyses, and maximize the utility of saliva in advancing personalized medicine and public health.

唾液生物银行:收集,处理和储存实践的范围审查,以提高诊断潜力。
目的:本研究旨在系统地绘制用于生物银行目的的唾液收集、处理和储存方法的文献,确定当前的做法和标准化的差距。材料与方法:系统检索5个电子数据库和灰色文献。纳入了使用唾液进行生物银行横断面和纵向研究的原创研究文章,以及建立生物银行的报告和方案。该综述遵循系统评价的首选报告项目和范围评价的元分析扩展指南,由两名评审员独立评估合格性并提取数据。结果:共纳入50篇文章,显示大多数研究是关于生物库建立的报告(38%),其次是纵向研究(28%)、方案研究(20%)和横断面研究(14%)。唾液收集方法各不相同,商业试剂盒报告最多(40%),其次是无菌管(22%)。虽然64%的研究描述了处理方法,78%的研究报告了储存方法,但报告中存在重大差距。未受刺激的唾液是最常见的样本类型(38%),大多数研究集中在成年参与者(46%),通常有疾病(36%)。然而,许多研究没有提供收集方法、处理技术、储存条件或参与者人口统计数据的足够细节。结论:本综述强调了唾液生物库标准化方案的迫切需要,以确保诊断研究的一致性、可靠性和可重复性。研究方法缺乏一致性限制了唾液生物库作为识别全身和口腔疾病生物标志物资源的潜力。建立统一的指导方针将加强国际合作,实现强有力的分析,并在推进个性化医疗和公共卫生方面最大限度地利用唾液。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Biopreservation and Biobanking
Biopreservation and Biobanking Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-General Biochemistry,Genetics and Molecular Biology
自引率
12.50%
发文量
114
期刊介绍: Biopreservation and Biobanking is the first journal to provide a unifying forum for the peer-reviewed communication of recent advances in the emerging and evolving field of biospecimen procurement, processing, preservation and banking, distribution, and use. The Journal publishes a range of original articles focusing on current challenges and problems in biopreservation, and advances in methods to address these issues related to the processing of macromolecules, cells, and tissues for research. In a new section dedicated to Emerging Markets and Technologies, the Journal highlights the emergence of new markets and technologies that are either adopting or disrupting the biobank framework as they imprint on society. The solutions presented here are anticipated to help drive innovation within the biobank community. Biopreservation and Biobanking also explores the ethical, legal, and societal considerations surrounding biobanking and biorepository operation. Ideas and practical solutions relevant to improved quality, efficiency, and sustainability of repositories, and relating to their management, operation and oversight are discussed as well.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信