ArticleJournal of viral hepatitis2015
Gene expression analysis in serial liver fine needle aspirates.
Article in Journal of viral hepatitis, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel digital droplet inverse PCR assay shows that natural clearance of hepatitis B infection is associated with fewer viral integrations.Emerging microbes & infections · 2025Article
- Feasibility of hepatic fine needle aspiration as a minimally invasive sampling method for gene expression quantification of pharmacogenetic targets in dogs.Veterinary medicine and science · 2021Article
- Paritaprevir and Ritonavir Liver Concentrations in Rats as Assessed by Different Liver Sampling Techniques.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2017Article
- Ultra-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry for determination of Direct Acting Antiviral drugs in human liver fine needle aspirates.Journal of chromatography. B, Analytical technologies in the biomedical and life sciences · 2017Article
- Intrahepatic Sampling for the Elucidation of Antiviral Clinical Pharmacology.Clinical pharmacology in drug development · 2017Article
- Development and validation of a UPLC-MS/MS method for the simultaneous determination of paritaprevir and ritonavir in rat liver.Bioanalysis · 2016Article
- Intrahepatic antiviral quantification in a patient undergoing orthotopic cadaveric liver transplantation.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
No method with low morbidity presently exists for obtaining serial hepatic gene expression measurements in humans. While hepatic fine needle aspiration (FNA) has lower morbidity than core needle biopsy, applicability is limited due to blood contamination, which confounds quantification of gene expression changes. The aim of this study was to validate FNA for assessment of hepatic gene expression. Liver needle biopsies and FNA procedures were simultaneously performed on 17 patients with chronic hepatitis C virus infection with an additional FNA procedure 1 week later. Nine patients had mild/moderate fibrosis and eight advanced fibrosis. Gene expression profiling was performed using Affymetrix microarrays and TaqMan qPCR; pathway analysis was performed using Ingenuity. We developed a novel strategy that applies liver-enriched normalization genes to determine the percentage of liver in the FNA sample, which enables accurate gene expression measurements overcoming biases derived from blood contamination. We obtained almost identical gene expression results (ρ = 0.99, P < 0.0001) comparing needle biopsy and FNA samples for 21 preselected genes. Gene expression results were also validated in dogs. These data suggest that liver FNA is a reliable method for serial hepatic tissue sampling with potential utility for a variety of preclinical and clinical applications.
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.