Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25836717›Full record

ReviewCancer research2015

Accuracy of Molecular Data Generated with FFPE Biospecimens: Lessons from the Literature.

Sarah R Greytak, Kelly B Engel, B Paige Bass, Helen M Moore

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing 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

49 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. FFPE-CUTAC: A Single Assay, Multiple Layers.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The Gastric Cancer Registry: A Genomic Translational Resource for Multidisciplinary Research in Gastric Cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Effect of Antigen Retrieval on Genomic DNA From Immunodissected Samples.The journal of histochemistry and cytochemistry : official journal of the Histochemistry Society · 2022
    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

4 authors.

Sarah R GreytakKelly Government Solutions, Rockville, Maryland.
Kelly B EngelPreferred Solutions Group, Arlington, Virginia.
B Paige BassKelly Government Solutions, Rockville, Maryland.
Helen M MooreBiorepositories and Biospecimen Research Branch, Cancer Diagnosis Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland. moorehe@mail.nih.gov.

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue biospecimens are a valuable resource for molecular cancer research. Although much can be gained from their use, it remains unclear whether the genomic and expression profiles obtained from FFPE biospecimens accurately reflect the physiologic condition of the patient from which they were procured, or if such profiles are confounded by biologic effects from formalin fixation and processing. To assess the physiologic accuracy of genomic and expression data generated with FFPE specimens, we surveyed the literature for articles investigating genomic and expression endpoints in case-matched FFPE and fresh or frozen human biospecimens using the National Cancer Institute's Biospecimen Research Database (http://biospecimens.cancer.gov/brd). Results of the survey revealed that the level of concordance between differentially preserved biospecimens varied among analytical parameters and platforms but also among reports, genes/transcripts of interest, and tumor status. The identified analytical techniques and parameters that resulted in strong correlations between FFPE and frozen biospecimens may provide guidance when optimizing molecular protocols for FFPE use; however, discrepancies reported for similar assays also illustrate the importance of validating protocols optimized for use with FFPE specimens with a case-matched fresh or frozen cohort for each platform, gene or transcript, and FFPE processing regime. On the basis of evidence published to date, validation of analytical parameters with a properly handled frozen cohort is necessary to ensure a high degree of concordance and confidence in the results obtained with FFPE biospecimens.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingGenomicsParaffin EmbeddingCase-Control StudiesFormaldehydeFrozen SectionsGenotyping TechniquesHumansOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisReproducibility of ResultsSpecimen HandlingTissue FixationFormaldehyde

Identifiers

PMID25836717
PMCPMC4636024

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.