Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30046134›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2018

Analysis of public RNA-sequencing data reveals biological consequences of genetic heterogeneity in cell line populations.

Erik Fasterius, Cristina Al-Khalili Szigyarto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

2 authors.

Erik FasteriusSchool of Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health, KTH-Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
Cristina Al-Khalili SzigyartoSchool of Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health, KTH-Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. caks@kth.se.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Meta-analysis of datasets available in public repositories are used to gather and summarise experiments performed across laboratories, as well as to explore consistency of scientific findings. As data quality and biological equivalency across samples may obscure such analyses and consequently their conclusions, we investigated the comparability of 85 public RNA-seq cell line datasets. Thousands of pairwise comparisons of single nucleotide variants in 139 samples revealed variable genetic heterogeneity of the eight cell line populations analysed as well as variable data quality. The H9 and HCT116 cell lines were found to be remarkably stable across laboratories (with median concordances of 99.2% and 98.5%, respectively), in contrast to the highly variable HeLa cells (89.3%). We show that the genetic heterogeneity encountered greatly affects gene expression between same-cell comparisons, highlighting the importance of interrogating the biological equivalency of samples when comparing experimental datasets. Both the number of differentially expressed genes and the expression levels negatively correlate with the genetic heterogeneity. Finally, we demonstrate how comparing genetically heterogeneous datasets affect gene expression analyses and that high dissimilarity between same-cell datasets alters the expression of more than 300 cancer-related genes, which are often the focus of studies using cell lines.

Indexed as

Genetic HeterogeneityHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingSequence Analysis, RNADatabases, GeneticGene Expression ProfilingHCT116 CellsHeLa CellsHumansRNARNA

Identifiers

PMID30046134
PMCPMC6060100

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.