ReviewFrontiers in genetics2026
Advances in algorithms for normalizer gene selection in qRT-PCR: implications for cancer biology and precision medicine.
Review in Frontiers in genetics, 2026. 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.
- Quantification of EV-associated miRNA in liquid biopsies for biomarker signature development.Extracellular vesicles and circulating nucleic acids · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quantitative Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (qRT-PCR) plays a significant role in gene expression analysis in cancer research and precision medicine. It allows precise quantification of gene expression variation which is necessary for understanding tumor biology, identifying predictive biomarkers and developing therapeutics interventions. However the accuracy and stability of qRT-PCR data heavily rely on finding stable reference genes. The gene stability refers to minimal variation in expression levels of a candidate reference gene across different biological conditions, sample groups and technical replicates. Traditionally, housekeeping genes such as β-actin, GAPDH and 18S rRNA have been used for normalization but consistency and variation can vary under different experimental settings. Over time, mathematical and statistical tools such as geNorm, NormFinder, BestKeeper and gQuant have been developed to find most stable reference genes. These algorithms have become essential in ensuring accurate and reproducible data in cancer research, where gene expression profiles can vary significantly across different tumor types, stages and individual patients. This review focuses on the progression and advancements of traditional and advanced reference gene selection methods, applications in cancer research and their significant role in precision medicine. It presents an overview of the commonly employed normalizers, outlining their respective advantages and limitations, and includes a concise discussion on the assessment of gene stability across diverse experimental contexts. Additionally, it emphasizes their use in cancer research and their importance in enhancing the accuracy and consistency of gene expression normalization, particularly within precision medicine.
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.