Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15151703›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2004

Microarray analysis in clinical oncology: pre-clinical optimization using needle core biopsies from xenograft tumors.

Elizabeth M Goley, Soni J Anderson, Cynthia Ménard, Eric Chuang, Xing Lü, Philip J Tofilon, Kevin Camphausen

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Elizabeth M GoleyRadiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, DHHS, Bethesda, MD, USA. goleye@mail.nih.gov
Soni J Anderson
Cynthia Ménard
Eric Chuang
Xing Lü
Philip J Tofilon
Kevin Camphausen
National Cancer Institute · USNational Institutes of Health · USUnited States Department of Health and Human Services · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDNA microarray profiling performed on clinical tissue specimens can potentially provide significant information regarding human cancer biology. Biopsy cores, the typical source of human tumor tissue, however, generally provide very small amounts of RNA (0.3-15 microg). RNA amplification is a common method used to increase the amount of material available for hybridization experiments. Using human xenograft tissue, we sought to address the following three questions: 1) is amplified RNA representative of the original RNA profile? 2) what is the minimum amount of total RNA required to perform a representative amplification? 3) are the direct and indirect methods of labeling the hybridization probe equivalent?

methodsTotal RNA was extracted from human xenograft tissue and amplified using a linear amplification process. RNA was labeled and hybridized, and the resulting images yielded data that was extracted into two categories using the mAdb system: "all genes" and "outliers". Scatter plots were generated for each slide and Pearson Coefficients of correlation were obtained.

resultsResults show that the amplification of 5 microg of total RNA yields a Pearson Correlation Coefficient of 0.752 (N = 6,987 genes) between the amplified and total RNA samples. We subsequently determined that amplification of 0.5 microg of total RNA generated a similar Pearson Correlation Coefficient as compared to the corresponding original RNA sample. Similarly, sixty-nine percent of total RNA outliers were detected with 5 microg of amplified starting RNA, and 55% of outliers were detected with 0.5 microg of starting RNA. However, amplification of 0.05 microg of starting RNA resulted in a loss of fidelity (Pearson Coefficient 0.669 between amplified and original samples, 44% outlier concordance). In these studies the direct or indirect methods of probe labeling yielded similar results. Finally, we examined whether RNA obtained from needle core biopsies of human tumor xenografts, amplified and indirectly labeled, would generate representative array profiles compared to larger excisional biopsy material. In this analysis correlation coefficients were obtained ranging from 0.750-0.834 between U251 biopsy cores and excised tumors, and 0.812-0.846 between DU145 biopsy cores and excised tumors.

conclusionThese data suggest that needle core biopsies can be used as reliable tissue samples for tumor microarray analysis after linear amplification and either indirect or direct labeling of the starting RNA.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiopsy, NeedleCell Line, TumorGene Expression ProfilingHumansMiceMice, SCIDOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisRNA, NeoplasmTransplantation, HeterologousRNA, Neoplasm

Identifiers

PMID15151703
PMCPMC441381
OpenAlexW1879520355

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.