ArticleBiomolecular detection and quantification2016
An international comparability study on quantification of mRNA gene expression ratios: CCQM-P103.1.
Article in Biomolecular detection and quantification, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Potential efficacy of digital polymerase chain reaction for non-invasive prenatal screening of autosomal aneuploidies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Pooled it
- Optimizing C-Type Natriuretic Peptide and Receptor Expression Analysis with Droplet Digital™ PCR: Advancing Biomarker Discovery for Brugada Syndrome?Biomolecules · 2025Article
- Reliable biological and multi-omics research through biometrology.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2024Review
- An overview of molecular markers for identification of non-human fecal pollution sources.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- Applicability of Control Materials To Support Gene Promoter Characterization and Expression in Engineered Cells Using Digital PCR.Analytical chemistry · 2022Article
- Development of SARS-CoV-2 packaged RNA reference material for nucleic acid testing.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2022Article
- Metrological framework to support accurate, reliable, and reproducible nucleic acid measurements.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2022Review
- Ribozyme-Mediated Downregulation Uncovers DNA Integrity Scanning Protein A (DisA) as a Solventogenesis Determinant inFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- Oncotype DX Breast Cancer recurrence score resists inter-assay reproducibility with RTScientific reports · 2019Article
- Improving the standardization of mRNA measurement by RT-qPCR.Biomolecular detection and quantification · 2018Article
- Droplet Digital PCR versus qPCR for gene expression analysis with low abundant targets: from variable nonsense to publication quality data.Scientific reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
44 authors at 11 institutions in 10 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measurement of RNA can be used to study and monitor a range of infectious and non-communicable diseases, with profiling of multiple gene expression mRNA transcripts being increasingly applied to cancer stratification and prognosis. An international comparison study (Consultative Committee for Amount of Substance (CCQM)-P103.1) was performed in order to evaluate the comparability of measurements of RNA copy number ratio for multiple gene targets between two samples. Six exogenous synthetic targets comprising of External RNA Control Consortium (ERCC) standards were measured alongside transcripts for three endogenous gene targets present in the background of human cell line RNA. The study was carried out under the auspices of the Nucleic Acids (formerly Bioanalysis) Working Group of the CCQM. It was coordinated by LGC (United Kingdom) with the support of National Institute of Standards and Technology (USA) and results were submitted from thirteen National Metrology Institutes and Designated Institutes. The majority of laboratories performed RNA measurements using RT-qPCR, with datasets also being submitted by two laboratories based on reverse transcription digital polymerase chain reaction and one laboratory using a next-generation sequencing method. In RT-qPCR analysis, the RNA copy number ratios between the two samples were quantified using either a standard curve or a relative quantification approach. In general, good agreement was observed between the reported results of ERCC RNA copy number ratio measurements. Measurements of the RNA copy number ratios for endogenous genes between the two samples were also consistent between the majority of laboratories. Some differences in the reported values and confidence intervals ('measurement uncertainties') were noted which may be attributable to choice of measurement method or quantification approach. This highlights the need for standardised practices for the calculation of fold change ratios and uncertainties in the area of gene expression profiling.
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.