ArticleVeterinary medicine and science2021
Feasibility of hepatic fine needle aspiration as a minimally invasive sampling method for gene expression quantification of pharmacogenetic targets in dogs.
Article in Veterinary medicine and science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility of hepatic fine needle aspiration as a minimally invasive sampling method for gene expression quantification of pharmacogenetic targets in dogs.Veterinary medicine and science · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQuantifying hepatic gene expression is important for many pharmacogenetic studies. However, this usually requires biopsy (BX), which is invasive.
objectivesThe objectives of this study were to determine the feasibility of using minimally invasive fine needle aspirate (FNA) to quantify hepatic gene expression and to assess expression variability between different sampling sites.
methodsBiopsy and FNA samples were acquired from central and peripheral locations of the right and left lateral liver lobes of a dog. Relative expression of ABCB1, GSTT1 and CYP3A12 were measured via reverse transcriptase, quantitative PCR. The effect of sampling method, lobe and location within the lobe on gene expression was assessed using a three-way ANOVA.
resultsRelative expression of ABCB1 and GSTT1 were not statistically different between sampling methods but CYP3A12 expression was higher in samples collected by BX (p = .013). Lobe sampled affected ABCB1 expression (p = .001) and site within lobe affected ABCB1 (p = .018) and GSTT1 (p = .025) expression.
conclusionsFNA appears to be a feasible technique for minimally invasive evaluation of hepatic gene expression but results should not be directly compared to biopsy samples. Sampling location impacts expression of some targets; combination of FNAs from multiple sites may reduce variation.
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.