ArticleScientific reports2022
Examining potential confounding factors in gene expression analysis of human saliva and identifying potential housekeeping genes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systems biology network analysis of root resorption biomarkers and their clinical relevance in orthodontics: a pilot study.Genomics & informatics · 2026Article
- Toll-Like Receptor Genes and Risk of Latent Tuberculosis Infection in People Infected with HIV-1.Viruses · 2024Article
- Applicability of Gene Expression in Saliva as an Alternative to Blood for Biodosimetry and Prediction of Radiation-induced Health Effects.Radiation research · 2024Article
- Evaluating and optimizing Acid-pH and Direct Lysis RNA extraction for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection in whole saliva.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Characterization of non-invasive oropharyngeal samples and nucleic acid isolation for molecular diagnostics.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Performance and overview of clinically relevant areas of application of saliva testing in the cat.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Review
- Obtaining miRNA from Saliva-Comparison of Sampling and Purification Methods.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Gene expression for biodosimetry and effect prediction purposes: promises, pitfalls and future directions - key session ConRad 2021.International journal of radiation biology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 9 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Isolation of RNA from whole saliva, a non-invasive and easily accessible biofluid that is an attractive alternative to blood for high-throughput biodosimetry of radiological/nuclear victims might be of clinical significance for prediction and diagnosis of disease. In a previous analysis of 12 human samples we identified two challenges to measuring gene expression from total RNA: (1) the fraction of human RNA in whole saliva was low and (2) the bacterial contamination was overwhelming. To overcome these challenges, we performed selective cDNA synthesis for human RNA species only by employing poly(A)+-tail primers followed by qRT-PCR. In the current study, this approach was independently validated on 91 samples from 61 healthy donors. Additionally, we used the ratio of human to bacterial RNA to adjust the input RNA to include equal amounts of human RNA across all samples before cDNA synthesis, which then ensured comparable analysis using the same base human input material. Furthermore, we examined relative levels of ten known housekeeping genes, and assessed inter- and intra-individual differences in 61 salivary RNA isolates, while considering effects of demographical factors (e.g. sex, age), epidemiological factors comprising social habits (e.g. alcohol, cigarette consumption), oral hygiene (e.g. flossing, mouthwash), previous radiological diagnostic procedures (e.g. number of CT-scans) and saliva collection time (circadian periodic). Total human RNA amounts appeared significantly associated with age only (P ≤ 0.02). None of the chosen housekeeping genes showed significant circadian periodicity and either did not associate or were weakly associated with the 24 confounders examined, with one exception, 60% of genes were altered by mouthwash. ATP6, ACTB and B2M represented genes with the highest mean baseline expression (Ct-values ≤ 30) and were detected in all samples. Combining these housekeeping genes for normalization purposes did not decrease inter-individual variance, but increased the robustness. In summary, our work addresses critical confounders and provides important information for the successful examination of gene expression in human whole saliva.
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.