Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38957806›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2024

A comparative analysis of RNA-Seq and NanoString technologies in deciphering viral infection response in upper airway lung organoids.

Mostafa Rezapour, Stephen J Walker, David A Ornelles, Muhammad Khalid Khan Niazi, Patrick M McNutt, Anthony Atala, Metin Nafi Gurcan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Instruction tuning for colorectal histopathology: a multimodal vision-language assistant on human-evaluated data.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

7 authors.

Mostafa RezapourCenter for Artificial Intelligence Research, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, United States.
Stephen J WalkerWake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, United States.
David A OrnellesDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, United States.
Muhammad Khalid Khan NiaziCenter for Artificial Intelligence Research, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, United States.
Patrick M McNuttWake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, United States.
Anthony AtalaWake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, United States.
Metin Nafi GurcanCenter for Artificial Intelligence Research, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we delved into the comparative analysis of gene expression data across RNA-Seq and NanoString platforms. While RNA-Seq covered 19,671 genes and NanoString targeted 773 genes associated with immune responses to viruses, our primary focus was on the 754 genes found in both platforms. Our experiment involved 16 different infection conditions, with samples derived from 3D airway organ-tissue equivalents subjected to three virus types, influenza A virus (IAV), human metapneumovirus (MPV), and parainfluenza virus 3 (PIV3). Post-infection measurements, after UV (inactive virus) and Non-UV (active virus) treatments, were recorded at 24-h and 72-h intervals. Including untreated and Mock-infected OTEs as control groups enabled differentiating changes induced by the virus from those arising due to procedural elements. Through a series of methodological approaches (including Spearman correlation, Distance correlation, Bland-Altman analysis, Generalized Linear Models Huber regression, the Magnitude-Altitude Score (MAS) algorithm and Gene Ontology analysis) the study meticulously contrasted RNA-Seq and NanoString datasets. The Magnitude-Altitude Score algorithm, which integrates both the amplitude of gene expression changes (magnitude) and their statistical relevance (altitude), offers a comprehensive tool for prioritizing genes based on their differential expression profiles in specific viral infection conditions. We observed a strong congruence between the platforms, especially in identifying key antiviral defense genes. Both platforms consistently highlighted genes including ISG15, MX1, RSAD2, and members of the OAS family (OAS1, OAS2, OAS3). The IFIT proteins (IFIT1, IFIT2, IFIT3) were emphasized for their crucial role in counteracting viral replication by both platforms. Additionally, CXCL10 and CXCL11 were pinpointed, shedding light on the organ tissue equivalent's innate immune response to viral infections. While both platforms provided invaluable insights into the genetic landscape of organoids under viral infection, the NanoString platform often presented a more detailed picture in situations where RNA-Seq signals were more subtle. The combined data from both platforms emphasize their joint value in advancing our understanding of viral impacts on lung organoids.

Indexed as

concordance analysisgene expression analysisinfected lung organoidsNanoString technologiesRNA-Seq

Identifiers

PMID38957806
PMCPMC11217172

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.