ArticleJournal of the American Society of Cytopathology
Comparative analysis of Ficoll-Hypaque and CytoLyt techniques for blood removal in breast cancer malignant effusions: effects on RNA quality and sequencing outcomes.
Article in Journal of the American Society of Cytopathology. 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.
- Pre-analytical Best Practices for RNA Sequencing from Small Biopsies and Cytologic Specimens.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionTo optimize RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) outcomes, we investigated preanalytical variables in malignant effusions containing metastatic breast cancer. We compared 2 processing methods-Ficoll-Hypaque density gradient enrichment and CytoLyt hemolysis-focusing on their effects on RNA quality, transcript abundance, and variant detection from cytospin slides, relative to fresh-frozen samples. Additionally, we compared read-based and Unique Molecular Identifier (UMI)-based library preparation methods. MATERIALS AND
methodsThirteen malignant effusion specimens from metastatic breast cancer were processed using both the Ficoll-Hypaque and Cytolyt methods. RNA was extracted from fresh-frozen samples stored in RNA preservative and from cytospin slides fixed in Carnoy's solution. RNA quality was evaluated using RNA integrity number (RIN) and the percentage of fragments >200 bases (DV200). Sequencing was conducted with both read- and UMI-based methods.
resultsPurified RNA was more fragmented by the Cytolyt method (mean RIN: 3.56, DV200: 78.97%), compared to the Ficoll-Hypaque method (mean RIN: 6.29, DV200: 88.08%). Sequencing data had high concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) for measurements of gene expression, whether from Cytolyt or Ficoll-Hypaque treated samples, and whether using the UMI- or read-based sequencing methods (read-based mean CCC: 0.967 from Cytolyt versus 0.974 from Ficoll-Hypaque, UMI-based mean CCC: 0.972 from Cytolyt versus 0.977 from Ficoll-Hypaque).
conclusionsDespite the increased RNA fragmentation with the Cytolyt, RNA-seq data quality was comparable across Cytolyt and Ficoll-Hypaque methods. Both clearing methods are viable for short-read RNA-seq analysis, with read and UMI-based approaches performing similarly.
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.