ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Evaluating the reliability of tools for mRNA annotation and IRES studies.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Since the discovery of viral Internal Ribosome Entry Sites (IRESes), researchers have sought to find similar elements in mammalian host genes, termed "cellular IRESes". However, the plasmid systems used to measure cellular IRES activity are vulnerable to false positives due to promoter activity in candidate IRESes. Orthogonal methods are needed to validate putative IRESes while carefully avoiding artifacts known to cause false positives. Recently, Koch et al. proposed approaches for studying IRESes, primarily circular RNA-generating plasmids, and for validating mRNA transcripts using smFISH and qRT-PCR. Here, we demonstrate confounding variables and artifacts in each of these approaches that can lead to inappropriate conclusions about potential cellular IRES activity. We show the back-splicing circRNA plasmid creates linear mRNA artifacts associated with false-positive IRES signals. Using orthogonal, gold-standard assays validated with viral IRESes, we find putative cellular IRESes reported using the back-splicing plasmid have no IRES activity. Furthermore, we demonstrate that smFISH and qRT-PCR can misidentify nuclear non-coding RNAs as mRNAs and we validate a single molecule sequencing assay for identifying genuine mRNA 5' ends. Our work establishes reliable methods for robust transcript annotation and IRES studies that avoid documented artifacts arising from bicistronic and back-splicing circRNA plasmid reporters.
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.