Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34362351›Full record

ArticleBMC biotechnology2021

Evaluation of RNA isolation methods for microRNA quantification in a range of clinical biofluids.

Henk P Roest, Jan N M IJzermans, Luc J W van der Laan

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC biotechnology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Carotenoids in Health as Studied by Omics-Related Endpoints.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2023
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Henk P RoestDepartment of Surgery, Laboratory of Experimental Transplantation and Intestinal Surgery (LETIS), Erasmus MC - University Medical Center, P.O. Box 2040, Room Na-1005, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. h.roest@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID 0000-0003-4422-3807
Jan N M IJzermansDepartment of Surgery, Laboratory of Experimental Transplantation and Intestinal Surgery (LETIS), Erasmus MC - University Medical Center, P.O. Box 2040, Room Na-1005, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Luc J W van der LaanDepartment of Surgery, Laboratory of Experimental Transplantation and Intestinal Surgery (LETIS), Erasmus MC - University Medical Center, P.O. Box 2040, Room Na-1005, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExtracellular microRNAs (miRNAs), released from cells into biofluids, have emerged as promising biomarkers for diagnostic and prognostic purposes. Several RNA isolation methods are available for the analysis of these cell-free miRNAs by RT-qPCR. Not all methods, however, are equally suitable for different biofluids. Here, we extracted total RNA from four very diverse biofluids: serum, urine, bile, and graft preservation fluid (perfusate). Four different protocols were used: a phenol-chloroform extraction and alcohol precipitation in combination with a precipitation carrier (QP) and three different column-based isolation methods, one with phenol-chloroform extraction (RN) and two without (NG and CU). For this range of clinical biofluid samples, we evaluated the potential of these different RNA isolation methods assessing recovery efficiency and the co-purification of RT-qPCR inhibiting compounds.

resultsDifferences were observed between each of the RNA isolation methods in the recovery of cel-miR-39, a synthetic miRNA spiked in during the workup procedure, and for endogenous miRNAs. Co-purification of heparin, a known RT-qPCR inhibitor, was assessed using heparinase I during cDNA synthesis. RT-qPCR detection of synthetic miRNAs cel-miR-39, spiked in during RNA workup, cel-miR-54, spiked in during cDNA synthesis, and endogenous miRNAs was strongly improved in the presence of heparinase I for some, but not all, isolation methods. Other, co-isolated RT-qPCR inhibitors were not identified, except for biliverdin, which co-isolated from some bile samples with one of the methods. In addition, we observed that serum and urine contain compounds that enhance the binding of heparin to certain solid-phase columns.

conclusionsFor reliable measurements of miRNA-based biomarkers in biofluids, optimization of RNA isolation procedures is recommended as methods can differ in miRNA detection and in co-purification of RT-qPCR inhibitory compounds. Heparinase I treatment confirmed that heparin appeared to be the major RT-qPCR inhibiting compound, but also biliverdin, co-isolated from bile, could interfere with detection.

Indexed as

BileBiomarkersBody FluidsChemical FractionationHumansMicroRNAsReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSerumUrineBiomarkersMicroRNAsBiofluidGraft preservationHeparin contaminationmicroRNAmiRNA isolationRT-qPCR

Identifiers

PMID34362351
PMCPMC8344161
OpenAlexW3109882140

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.