ArticleHistochemistry and cell biology2024
Be bold, start cold! cold formalin fixation of colorectal cancer specimens granted superior DNA and RNA quality for downstream molecular analysis.
Article in Histochemistry and cell biology, 2024. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of cold formalin fixation (CFF; i.e., fixating tissue samples with 4 °C precooled formalin) recently attracted further attention owing to its putative improved ability to preserve nucleic acid compared with standard room temperature formalin (SFF). In this study, we aimed to assess the effect of four formalin-based fixation protocols (SFF, CFF, delayed formalin fixation-DFF, and cold formalin hyperfixation; CFH) on both DNA and RNA quality. We collected 97 colorectal cancer (CRC) and analyzed 23 metrics of nucleic acid quantity and quality yield using a multiplatform approach by combining spectrophotometric, fluorimetric, electrophoretic, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays. Following confirmation of fixation-protocol-related different effects via clustering analysis, CFF presented best metrics compared with all protocols, specifically positive coefficients of DV1000-60000, DV2/DV1, DNA λ ratio 260/230, and ABL gene expression absolute copies, and negative coefficient of DV150-1000. The SFF subgroup presented a positive coefficient of DV150-1000 and negative coefficients for DV1000-60000, DV2/DV1, RNA λ ratio 260/230, RNA QuBit concentration, DV100/200, RNA electrophoresis concentration and absolute quantity, and ABL copies. Overall, we confirmed the superior yield performances of CFF preservation for both DNA and RNA compared with the other protocols in our series of CRC samples. Pending further validations and clarification of the specific mechanisms behind these findings, our study supports the implementation of CFF in the pathology unit routine specimen management for tumor tissue molecular profiling.
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.