Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29771965›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Evaluation of commercial DNA and RNA extraction methods for high-throughput sequencing of FFPE samples.

Stine H Kresse, Heidi M Namløs, Susanne Lorenz, Jeanne-Marie Berner, Ola Myklebost, Bodil Bjerkehagen, Leonardo A Meza-Zepeda

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Comparison of RNA-Sequencing Methods for Degraded RNA.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Diagnostic utility of one-stop fusion gene panel to detect TFE3/TFEB gene rearrangement and amplification in renal cell carcinomas.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2021
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors.

Stine H KresseDepartment of Tumor Biology, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Heidi M NamløsDepartment of Tumor Biology, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Susanne LorenzDepartment of Tumor Biology, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Jeanne-Marie BernerDepartment of Pathology, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Ola MyklebostDepartment of Tumor Biology, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Bodil BjerkehagenDepartment of Pathology, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Leonardo A Meza-ZepedaDepartment of Tumor Biology, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-3056-212X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nucleic acid material of adequate quality is crucial for successful high-throughput sequencing (HTS) analysis. DNA and RNA isolated from archival FFPE material are frequently degraded and not readily amplifiable due to chemical damage introduced during fixation. To identify optimal nucleic acid extraction kits, DNA and RNA quantity, quality and performance in HTS applications were evaluated. DNA and RNA were isolated from five sarcoma archival FFPE blocks, using eight extraction protocols from seven kits from three different commercial vendors. For DNA extraction, the truXTRAC FFPE DNA kit from Covaris gave higher yields and better amplifiable DNA, but all protocols gave comparable HTS library yields using Agilent SureSelect XT and performed well in downstream variant calling. For RNA extraction, all protocols gave comparable yields and amplifiable RNA. However, for fusion gene detection using the Archer FusionPlex Sarcoma Assay, the truXTRAC FFPE RNA kit from Covaris and Agencourt FormaPure kit from Beckman Coulter showed the highest percentage of unique read-pairs, providing higher complexity of HTS data and more frequent detection of recurrent fusion genes. truXTRAC simultaneous DNA and RNA extraction gave similar outputs as individual protocols. These findings show that although successful HTS libraries could be generated in most cases, the different protocols gave variable quantity and quality for FFPE nucleic acid extraction. Selecting the optimal procedure is highly valuable and may generate results in borderline quality specimens.

Indexed as

Paraffin EmbeddingAnimalsDNAHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansRNADNARNA

Identifiers

PMID29771965
PMCPMC5957415

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.