Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32150588›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

An optimised saliva collection method to produce high-yield, high-quality RNA for translational research.

Roisin Sullivan, Susan Heavey, David G Graham, Rachel Wellman, Saif Khan, Sri Thrumurthy, Benjamin S Simpson, Tina Baker, Sarah Jevons, Jose Ariza and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Obtaining miRNA from Saliva-Comparison of Sampling and Purification Methods.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Comparing SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in Human Saliva to Oropharyngeal Swabs, Nasopharyngeal Swabs, and Sputum: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2023
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

16 authors.

Roisin SullivanGastroenterological Intervention Centre (GENIE) and Molecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4636-8033
Susan HeaveyMolecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2974-4578
David G GrahamGastroenterological Intervention Centre (GENIE) and Molecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.
Rachel WellmanGastroenterological Intervention Centre (GENIE) and Molecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.
Saif KhanGastroenterological Intervention Centre (GENIE) and Molecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.
Sri ThrumurthyGastroenterological Intervention Centre (GENIE) and Molecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.
Benjamin S SimpsonMolecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.
Tina BakerGastroenterological Intervention Centre (GENIE) and Molecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.
Sarah JevonsGastroenterological Intervention Centre (GENIE) and Molecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.
Jose ArizaUniversity College London Hospital, London, England, United Kingdom.
Victor EnehUniversity College London Hospital, London, England, United Kingdom.
Hayley PyeMolecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.
Hayley LuxtonMolecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.
Rifat HamoudiGastroenterological Intervention Centre (GENIE) and Molecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.
Hayley WhitakerMolecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.
Laurence B LovatGastroenterological Intervention Centre (GENIE) and Molecular Diagnostics and Therapeutics Group, University College London, London, England, United Kingdom.

Funding

Cancer Research UKDepartment of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Saliva represents an ideal matrix for diagnostic biomarker development as it is readily available and requires no invasive collection procedures. However, salivary RNA is labile and rapidly degrades. Previous attempts to isolate RNA from saliva have yielded poor quality and low concentrations. Here we compare collection and processing methods and propose an approach for future studies. The effects of RNA stabilisers, storage temperatures, length of storage and fasting windows were investigated on pooled saliva samples from healthy volunteers. Isolated RNA was assessed for concentration and quality. Bacterial growth was investigated through RT-PCR using bacterial and human primers. Optimal conditions were implemented and quality controlled in a clinical setting. The addition of RNAlater increased mean RNA yield from 4912 ng/μl to 15,473 ng and RNA Integrity Number (RIN) from 4.5 to 7.0. No significant changes to RNA yield were observed for storage at room temperature beyond 1 day or at -80 °C. Bacterial growth did not occur in samples stored at ambient temperature for up to a week. There was a trend towards higher RNA concentration when saliva was collected after overnight fasting but no effect on RIN. In the clinic, RNA yields of 6307 ng and RINs of 3.9 were achieved, improving on previous reports. The method we describe here is a robust, clinically feasible saliva collection method using preservative that gives high concentrations and improved RINs compared to saliva collected without preservative.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultBacteriaFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansLiquid BiopsyMaleMiddle AgedRNASalivaSpecimen HandlingTranslational Research, BiomedicalYoung AdultRNA

Identifiers

PMID32150588
PMCPMC7062242

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.