↓ Skip to main content

Nucleic acid extraction from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded cancer cell line samples: a trade off between quantity and quality?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Clinical Pathology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#22 of 116)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Nucleic acid extraction from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded cancer cell line samples: a trade off between quantity and quality?
Published in
BMC Clinical Pathology, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12907-016-0039-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline Seiler, Alan Sharpe, J. Carl Barrett, Elizabeth A. Harrington, Emma V. Jones, Gayle B. Marshall

Abstract

Advanced genomic techniques such as Next-Generation-Sequencing (NGS) and gene expression profiling, including NanoString, are vital for the development of personalised medicines, as they enable molecular disease classification. This has become increasingly important in the treatment of cancer, aiding patient selection. However, it requires efficient nucleic acid extraction often from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue (FFPE). Here we provide a comparison of several commercially available manual and automated methods for DNA and/or RNA extraction from FFPE cancer cell line samples from Qiagen, life Technologies and Promega. Differing extraction geometric mean yields were evaluated across each of the kits tested, assessing dual DNA/RNA extraction vs. specialised single extraction, manual silica column based extraction techniques vs. automated magnetic bead based methods along with a comparison of subsequent nucleic acid purity methods, providing a full evaluation of nucleic acids isolated. Out of the four RNA extraction kits evaluated the RNeasy FFPE kit, from Qiagen, gave superior geometric mean yields, whilst the Maxwell 16 automated method, from Promega, yielded the highest quality RNA by quantitative real time RT-PCR. Of the DNA extraction kits evaluated the PicoPure DNA kit, from Life Technologies, isolated 2-14× more DNA. A miniaturised qPCR assay was developed for DNA quantification and quality assessment. Careful consideration of an extraction kit is necessary dependent on quality or quantity of material required. Here we provide a flow diagram on the factors to consider when choosing an extraction kit as well as how to accurately quantify and QC the extracted material.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 22%
Student > Master 15 18%
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Other 4 5%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 17 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 32 38%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 21 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 April 2021.
All research outputs
#6,447,992
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from BMC Clinical Pathology
#22
of 116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,015
of 307,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Clinical Pathology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 116 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,479 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them