ArticlePloS one2020
Comparison of procedures for RNA-extraction from peripheral blood mononuclear cells.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- MicroRNAs as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for viral myocarditis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2026Article
- Effects of Botanical Supplementation on Benzene-Induced Hematological, Histopathological, and Molecular Alterations in Rats : Short title: Botanical Supplementation In Benzene-Induced Leukemia Rats.Galen medical journal · 2026Article
- Article
- The Use of a Novel Container for Secured Transport and Storage of Biological Material for Quantitative Human RNA Analysis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Transcriptional profiles associated with coronary artery disease in type 2 diabetes mellitus.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Whole blood RNA extraction efficiency contributes to variability in RNA sequencing data sets.PloS one · 2023Article
- Effects of Ovine Monocyte-Derived Macrophage Infection by Recently IsolatedAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
- Comparison of Two RNA Extraction Methods for the Molecular Detection of SARS-CoV-2 from Nasopharyngeal Swab Samples.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Comparison of in-house SARS-CoV-2 genome extraction procedures. A need for COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of virological methods · 2022Article
- How long does the mRNA remains stable in untreated whole bovine blood?Molecular biology reports · 2022Article
- Methodologic Considerations for Epigenomic Investigation of Preterm Birth in African American Women.Western journal of nursing research · 2022Article
- Review
- Dataset of the transcriptomes ofData in brief · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
RNA quality and quantity are important factors for ensuring the accuracy of gene expression analysis and other RNA-based downstream applications. Thus far, only a limited number of methodological studies have compared sample storage and RNA extraction procedures for human cells. We compared three commercially available RNA extraction kits, i.e., (NucliSENS) easyMAG, RNeasy (Mini Kit) and RiboPure (RNA Purification Kit-blood). In addition, additional conditions, such as storage medium and storage temperature of human peripheral blood mononuclear cells were evaluated, i.e., 4 °C for RNAlater or -80 °C for QIAzol and for the respective cognate lysis buffers; easyMAG, RNeasy or RiboPure. RNA was extracted from aliquots that had been stored for one day (Run 1) or 83 days (Run 2). After DNase treatment, quantity and quality of RNA were assessed by means of a NanoDrop spectrophotometer, 2100 Bioanalyzer and RT-qPCR for the ACTB reference gene. We observed that high-quality RNA can be obtained using RNeasy and RiboPure, regardless of the storage medium, whereas samples stored in RNAlater resulted in the least amount of RNA extracted. In addition, RiboPure combined with storage of samples in its cognate lysis buffer yielded twice as much RNA as all other procedures. These results were supported by RT-qPCR and by the reproducibility observed for two independent extraction runs.
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.