Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23641797›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical bioinformatics2013

An optimized workflow for improved gene expression profiling for formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples.

Marlene Thomas, Manuela Poignée-Heger, Martin Weisser, Stephanie Wessner, Anton Belousov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical bioinformatics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Prognostic stromal gene signatures in breast cancer.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2015
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

5 authors.

Marlene ThomasPharma Research and Early Development (pRED), Roche Diagnostics GmbH, TR-H, Bldg 231/206a, Nonnenwald 2, 82377 Penzberg, Germany. marlene.thomas@roche.com.
Manuela Poignée-Heger
Martin Weisser
Stephanie Wessner
Anton Belousov

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhole genome microarray gene expression profiling is the 'gold standard' for the discovery of prognostic and predictive genetic markers for human cancers. However, suitable research material is lacking as most diagnostic samples are preserved as formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue (FFPET). We tested a new workflow and data analysis method optimized for use with FFPET samples.

methodsSixteen breast tumor samples were split into matched pairs and preserved as FFPET or fresh-frozen (FF). Total RNA was extracted and tested for yield and purity. RNA from FFPET samples was amplified using three different commercially available kits in parallel, and hybridized to Affymetrix GeneChip® Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Arrays. The array probe set was optimized in silico to exclude misdesigned and misannotated probes.

resultsFFPET samples processed using the WT-Ovation™ FFPE System V2 (NuGEN) provided 80% specificity and 97% sensitivity compared with FF samples (assuming values of 100%). In addition, in silico probe set redesign improved sequence detection sensitivity and, thus, may rescue potentially significant small-magnitude gene expression changes that could otherwise be diluted by the overall probe set background.

conclusionIn conclusion, our FFPET-optimized workflow enables the detection of more genes than previous, nonoptimized approaches, opening new possibilities for the discovery, validation, and clinical application of mRNA biomarkers in human diseases.

Identifiers

PMID23641797
PMCPMC3660273

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.