ArticlePeerJ2016
Determining the utility of veterinary tissue archives for retrospective DNA analysis.
Article in PeerJ, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- AnViruses · 2025Article
- Evaluating the potential of anti-dsRNA antibodies as an alternative viral sensing tool in encephalitides of different species.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- DNA purification increases PCR-amplifiable DNA extracted from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded canine mast cell tumors for routineJournal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Histopathology tissue archives can be an important source of specimens for retrospective studies, as these include samples covering a large number of diseases. In veterinary medicine, archives also contain samples from a large variety of species and may represent naturally-occurring models of human disease. The formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues comprising these archives are rich resources for retrospective molecular biology studies and pilot studies for biomarkers, as evidenced by a number of recent publications highlighting FFPE tissues as a resource for analysis of specific diseases. However, DNA extracted from FFPE specimens are modified and fragmented, making utilization challenging. The current study examines the utility of FFPE tissue samples from a veterinary diagnostic laboratory archive in five year intervals from 1977 to 2013, with 2015 as a control year, to determine how standard processing and storage conditions has affected their utility for future studies. There was a significant difference in our ability to obtain large amplicons from samples from 2015 than from the remaining years, as well as an inverse correlation between the age of the samples and product size obtainable. However, usable DNA samples were obtained in at least some of the samples from all years tested, despite variable storage, fixation, and processing conditions. This study will help make veterinary diagnostic laboratory archives more useful in future studies of human and veterinary disease.
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.