Methodological aspects of the informativeness of non‑commutable laboratory studies of biological analytes in the course of forensic biological examination
https://doi.org/10.33667/2078-5631-2025-22-70-73
Abstract
The article presents the results of methodological decisions for objectifying criteria for the reliability of laboratory studies of biological materials isolated from “material evidence” during forensic biological examination, i. e. not commutable for traditional laboratory technologies. The study was performed using the example of the dynamics of the content of total prostate-specific antigen in volunteers’ sperm in a laboratory model, where gauze was used as the tissue basis of “material evidence”, and the concentration of total PSA was determined by ELISA. The criteria for the reliability of laboratory test results are based on the principles of in-laboratory quality control.
About the Authors
V. L. Sidorov
St. Petersburg State Budgetary Healthcare Institution Bureau of Forensic Medical Examination; All-Russian Scientific Research and Testing Institute of Medical Technology of the Federal Service for Healthcare Supervision
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sidorov Vladimir L., PhD Bio, forensic expert of the Forensic Biology Dept; research fellow at Scientific and Practical Center for Testing Medical Devices
St. Petersburg
O. D. Yagmurov
St. Petersburg State Budgetary Healthcare Institution Bureau of Forensic Medical Examination
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Yagmurov Orazmurad D., Dr Bio Sci (habil.), professor, head
St. Petersburg
K. T. Momynaliev
All-Russian Scientific Research and Testing Institute of Medical Technology of the Federal Service for Healthcare Supervision
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Momynaliev Kuvat T., Dr Bio Sci (habil.), associate professor, head of Scientific and Practical Center for Testing Medical Devices
Moscow
I. V. Birulya
Academician I. P. Pavlov First St. Petersburg State Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Birulya Irina V., PhD Med, associate professor at Dept of Clinical Laboratory Diagnostics with a Course in Molecular Medicine
St. Petersburg
References
1. Sterzik V., Hinderberger P., Panzer S., Bohnert M. Visualizing old biological traces on different materials without using chemicals. Int. J. Legal. Med. 2018; 132 (1): 36–41.
2. Douglas H., Fraser I., Davidson G., Murphy C., Gorman C., Boyce M., Doole S. Assessing the background levels of body fluids on hands // Sci. Justice. 2023; 63 (4): 493–499.
3. Taylor A., Davidson G., Boyce M., Murphy C., Doole S., C. Rogers, Fraser I. Background levels of body fluids and DNA on the shaft of the penis and associated underpants in the absence of sexual activity. Sci. Justice. 2023; 63 (4): 529–536.
4. Alkhuder K. Attenuated total reflection-Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy: a universal analytical technique with promising applications in forensic analyses. Int. J. Legal. Med. 2022; 136. (6): 1717–1736.
5. Takamura A., Ozawa T. Recent advances of vibrational spectroscopy and chemometrics for forensic biological analysis. Analyst. 2021; 6;146 (24): 7431–7449.
6. Davidovics R., Saw Y. L., Brown C. O., Prinz M., McKiernan H.E., Danielson P. B., Legg K. M. High-throughput seminal fluid identification by automated immunoaffinity mass spectrometry. J. Forensic Sci. 2022; 67 (3): 1184–1190.
7. Peters K. S., Swaminathan H., Sheehan J., Duffy K. R., Lun D. S., Grgicak C. M. Production of high-fidelity electrophoregrams results in improved and consist DNAinterpretation: Standardizing the forensic validation process. Forensic Sci. Int. Genetic. 2017; 31: 160–170.
8. O’ Leary K. R., Glynn C. L. Investigating the isolation and amplification of microRNAs for forensic body fluid identification. Microrna. 2018; 7 (3): 187–194.
9. Mayes C., Houston R., Seashols-Williams S., LaRue B., Hughes-Stamm S. The stability and persistence of blood and semen mRNA and miRNA targets for body fluid identification in environmentally challenged and laundered samples. Leg. Med. (Tokyo). 2019; 38: 45–50.
10. Jonson E. D., Kotowski T. M. Detection of prostate specific antigen by ELISA. J. Forensic Sci. 1993; 38 (2): 250–258.
11. Feine I., Gafny I., Pinkas R. Combination of prostate-specific antigen detection and micro-Raman spectroscopy for confirmatory semen detection. Forensic Sci. Int. 2017; 270: 241–247.
12. Basset P., Blandin P., Grini A., Delemont S., Samie L., Castella V. A simplified protocol for the detection of blood, saliva, and semen from a single biological trace using immunochromatographic tests. Forensic Sci. Med. Pathol. 2022; 18 (2): 141–148.
13. Egger S., Vöhringer C., Währer J., Schulz I. Technical note: Comparison of forensic swabs for intravaginal sampling. Sci Justice. 2022; 62 (4): 418–423.
14. Kamenev L. Leclerq M., Francois-Gerard C. An enzyme immunoassay for prostate-specific p30 antigen detection in postcoital vaginal tract. J. Forensic Sci. Soc. 1989; 29 (4): 233–241.
Review
For citations:
Sidorov V.L., Yagmurov O.D., Momynaliev K.T., Birulya I.V. Methodological aspects of the informativeness of non‑commutable laboratory studies of biological analytes in the course of forensic biological examination. Medical alphabet. 2025;(22):70-73. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.33667/2078-5631-2025-22-70-73
Views:
69
Email this article 