ArticleScientific reports2021
A novel approach for microRNA in situ hybridization using locked nucleic acid probes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- MiRNAs as potential biomarkers in early breast cancer detection: a systematic review.Journal of medicine and life · 2024Pooled it
- Emerging biomarkers for early cancer detection and diagnosis: challenges, innovations, and clinical perspectives.European journal of medical research · 2025Review
- microRNAs as Biomarkers of Breast Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Insights into the role of miR-877 and histidine-rich glycoprotein in preeclampsia.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2025Article
- miRNAs in pancreatic cancer progression and metastasis.Clinical & experimental metastasis · 2024Review
- Lupus nephritis: The regulatory interplay between epigenetic and MicroRNAs.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Review
- Role of immunocytochemistry in cervical cancer screening.CytoJournal · 2022Review
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
Identification of target tissue microRNAs (miR) using in situ hybridization (ISH), with digoxigenin-labeled locked nucleic acid (LNA) probes, is influenced by preanalytic parameters. To determine the best retrieval method for common microRNAs, a multiblock composed of paraffin-embedded tonsil, cervix, placenta, and hyperplastic prostate tissue were included. Tissue were fixed in 10% formalin in a range of 5-144 hours (h). Cut sections (5 μm) from the multiblock were subjected to combinations of pretreatment procedures: variable periods of proteinase K (PK) digestion or Heat-induced microRNA Retrieval (HmiRR) using target retrieval solution (TRS) pH 6.1 or 9, with or without enzymatic treatment (pepsin). Results for the overall categories: TRS pH 9 versus PK; p = 2.9e-23, TRS pH 9 versus TRS pH 6.1; p = 1.1e-14, TRS pH 6.1 versus PK; p = 2.9e-03. A long fixation time, resulted in the best microRNA preservation and staining intensity (long vs. short: p = 3.5e-47, long vs. moderate: p = 1.6e-44, moderate vs. short: p = 4.3e-16), was enhanced using HmiRR TRS pH 9 with or without pepsin providing high sensitivity and specificity. These observations conflict with other ISH techniques (e.g., messenger ribonucleic acid), which typically require shorter fixation periods, and therefore, further studies are warranted.
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.