ArticleMolecular genetics and metabolism reports2019
Hydrophobic sand is a viable method of urine collection from the rat for extracellular vesicle biomarker analysis.
Article in Molecular genetics and metabolism reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Urinary Excretion of Iohexol as a Permeability Marker in a Mouse Model of Intestinal Inflammation: Time Course, Performance and Welfare Considerations.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
- Effect of embedded metal fragments on urinary metal levels and kidney biomarkers in the Sprague-Dawley rat.Toxicology reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previously we have shown in rats a new method of urine collection, hydrophobic sand, to be an acceptable alternate in place of the traditional method using metabolic cages. Hydrophobic sand is non-toxic, induces similar or lower levels of stress in the rat, and does not contaminate clinical urine markers nor metal concentrations in collected samples (Hoffman et al., 2017 and 2018). Urine is often used in humans and many animal models as a readily-attainable biosample which contains proteins and microRNAs (miRNAs) within extracellular vesicles (EVs) that can be isolated to indicate changes in health. In order to ensure hydrophobic sand did not in any way contaminate or disrupt the extraction and analysis of these EVs and miRNAs, we used urine samples from the same 8 rats in the within-subjects crossover experiment comparing hydrophobic sand and metabolic cage collection methods. We isolated EVs and miRNAs from the urine set and examined their quantity and quality between the urine collection methods. We found no significant differences in particle size, particle concentration, total RNA, or the type and abundance of miRNAs contained within the urine EVs due to urine collection method, suggesting hydrophobic sand represents an easy-to-use, non-invasive method to collect rodent urine for EVs and biomarker studies.
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.