Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27765019›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2016

Impact of RNA degradation on fusion detection by RNA-seq.

Jaime I Davila, Numrah M Fadra, Xiaoke Wang, Amber M McDonald, Asha A Nair, Barbara R Crusan, Xianglin Wu, Joseph H Blommel, Jin Jen, Kandelaria M Rumilla and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Xanthogranulomatous epithelial tumor: report of 6 cases of a novel, potentially deceptive lesion with a predilection for young women.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Gastroblastoma harbors a recurrent somatic MALAT1-GLI1 fusion gene.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2017
    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

15 authors.

Jaime I DavilaDepartment of Health Science Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. davila.jaime@mayo.edu.
Numrah M FadraDepartment of Health Science Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Xiaoke WangDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Amber M McDonaldDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Asha A NairDepartment of Health Science Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Barbara R CrusanDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Xianglin WuDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Joseph H BlommelDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Jin JenDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Kandelaria M RumillaDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Robert B JenkinsDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Umut AyparDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Eric W KleeDepartment of Health Science Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Benjamin R KippDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
Kevin C HallingDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRNA-seq is a well-established method for studying the transcriptome. Popular methods for library preparation in RNA-seq such as Illumina TruSeq® RNA v2 kit use a poly-A pulldown strategy. Such methods can cause loss of coverage at the 5' end of genes, impacting the ability to detect fusions when used on degraded samples. The goal of this study was to quantify the effects RNA degradation has on fusion detection when using poly-A selected mRNA and to identify the variables involved in this process.

resultsUsing both artificially and naturally degraded samples, we found that there is a reduced ability to detect fusions as the distance of the breakpoint from the 3' end of the gene increases. The median transcript coverage decreases exponentially as a function of the distance from the 3' end and there is a linear relationship between the coverage decay rate and the RNA integrity number (RIN). Based on these findings we developed plots that show the probability of detecting a gene fusion ("sensitivity") as a function of the distance of the fusion breakpoint from the 3' end.

conclusionsThis study developed a strategy to assess the impact that RNA degradation has on the ability to detect gene fusions by RNA-seq.

Indexed as

Recombination, GeneticRNA StabilityCell Line, TumorChromosome BreakpointsFusion Proteins, bcr-ablGene LibraryHumansLeukemia, Myelogenous, Chronic, BCR-ABL PositiveRNARNA, MessengerSequence Analysis, RNAFusion Proteins, bcr-ablRNARNA, MessengerFusion detectionPoly-A pulldownRNA degradationRNA-seq

Identifiers

PMID27765019
PMCPMC5072325

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.