Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31882887›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Identification of an optimal method for extracting RNA from human skin biopsy, using domestic pig as a model system.

Ene Reimann, Kristi Abram, Sulev Kõks, Külli Kingo, Alireza Fazeli

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Qualitative and quantitative analysis ofChinese herbal medicines · 2021
    Article
  8. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Ene ReimannDepartment of Pathophysiology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia. ene.reimann@ut.ee.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5410-4433
Kristi AbramDepartment of Dermatology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Sulev KõksCentre for Comparative Genomics, Murdoch University, Perth, 6150, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6087-6643
Külli KingoDepartment of Dermatology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Alireza FazeliDepartment of Pathophysiology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.
Tartu University Hospital · EEUniversity of Tartu · EEMurdoch University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To evaluate skin tissue gene expression patterns correctly, extracting sufficient quantities of good quality RNA is essential. However, RNA extraction from skin tissue is challenging, as the hyaluronic acid-collagen matrix is extremely difficult to homogenize. Although there are multiple ways to extract RNA from skin, there are no comparative studies that identify the most critical steps, e.g. sample collection, storage and homogenization. We analysed the various steps involved in RNA extraction (i.e. biopsy collection as dry biopsy or into nucleotide stabilizing reagents, different storage conditions, enzymatic digestion, stator-rotor and bead motion-based homogenizing combined with column-based RNA purification). We hypothesised that domestic pig skin is applicable as a model for human skin studies. Altogether twenty different workflows were tested on pig skin and the four most promising workflows were tested on human skin samples. The optimal strategy for extracting human skin RNA was to collect, store and homogenize the sample in RLT lysis buffer from the RNeasy Fibrous Tissue Kit combined with beta-mercaptoethanol. Both stator-rotor and bead motion-based homogenizing were found to result in high quality and quantity of extracted RNA. Our results confirmed that domestic pig skin can be successfully used as a model for human skin RNA studies.

Indexed as

SkinAnimalsBiopsyRNASpectrophotometrySus scrofaSwineRNA

Identifiers

PMID31882887
PMCPMC6934780
OpenAlexW2997738436

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.