ArticleAnalytical biochemistry2012
Deconvolution of the confounding variations for reverse transcription quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction by separate analysis of biological replicate data.
Article in Analytical biochemistry, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- When Two-Fold Is Not Enough: Quantifying Uncertainty in Low-Copy qPCR.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Assessing the necessity of technical replicates in reverse transcription quantitative PCR.BioTechniques · 2025Article
- Reference Genes for Expression Analyses by qRT-PCR inMicroorganisms · 2024Article
- Accumulation of amyloid-like Aβ1-42 in AEL (autophagy-endosomal-lysosomal) vesicles: potential implications for plaque biogenesis.ASN neuro · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Reverse transcription quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) uses threshold cycles (Ct values) for measuring relative gene expression. Ct values are signal-to-noise data composed of target gene expression and multiple sources of confounding variations. Data analysis is to minimize technical noises, evaluate biological variances, and estimate treatment-attributable expression changes of particular genes. However, this function is not sufficiently fulfilled in current analytic methods. An important but unrecognizable problem is that Ct values from all biological replicates and technical repeats are pooled across genes and treatment types. This violates the sample-specific association between target and reference genes, leading to inefficient removal of technical noises. To resolve this problem, here we propose to separate Ct values into replicate-specific data subsets and iteratively analyze expression ratios for individual data subsets. The individual expression ratios, rather than the raw Ct values, are pooled to determine the final expression change. The variances of all biological replicates and technical repeats across all target and reference genes are summed up. Our results from example data demonstrate that this separated method can substantially minimize RT-qPCR variance compared with the traditional methods using pooled Ct profiles. This analytic strategy is more effective in control of technical noises and improves the fidelity of RT-qPCR quantification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.