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

Q2 Medicine
BMC Clinical Pathology Pub Date : 2016-11-14 eCollection Date: 2016-01-01 DOI:10.1186/s12907-016-0039-3
Caroline Seiler, Alan Sharpe, J Carl Barrett, Elizabeth A Harrington, Emma V Jones, Gayle B Marshall
{"title":"Nucleic acid extraction from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded cancer cell line samples: a trade off between quantity and quality?","authors":"Caroline Seiler,&nbsp;Alan Sharpe,&nbsp;J Carl Barrett,&nbsp;Elizabeth A Harrington,&nbsp;Emma V Jones,&nbsp;Gayle B Marshall","doi":"10.1186/s12907-016-0039-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":35804,"journal":{"name":"BMC Clinical Pathology","volume":"16 ","pages":"17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12907-016-0039-3","citationCount":"30","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Clinical Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12907-016-0039-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 30

Abstract

Background: 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).

Methods: 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.

Results: 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.

Conclusions: 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.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

从福尔马林固定石蜡包埋癌细胞系样品中提取核酸:数量与质量之间的权衡?
背景:先进的基因组技术,如下一代测序(NGS)和基因表达谱,包括NanoString,对于个体化药物的发展至关重要,因为它们使分子疾病分类成为可能。这在癌症治疗中变得越来越重要,有助于患者的选择。然而,它通常需要从福尔马林固定石蜡包埋组织(FFPE)中高效提取核酸。方法:在这里,我们比较了几种市售的人工和自动方法,用于从Qiagen, life Technologies和Promega的FFPE癌细胞系样品中提取DNA和/或RNA。在每个测试的试剂盒中评估不同的提取几何平均产量,评估双重DNA/RNA提取与专门的单次提取,基于手工硅柱的提取技术与基于自动磁珠的方法,以及随后的核酸纯度方法的比较,提供对分离的核酸的全面评估。结果:在评估的四种RNA提取试剂盒中,Qiagen公司的RNeasy FFPE试剂盒具有优越的几何平均产率,而Promega公司的Maxwell 16自动化方法通过定量实时RT-PCR获得了最高质量的RNA。在评估的DNA提取试剂盒中,来自Life Technologies的PicoPure DNA试剂盒分离出了2-14倍的DNA。开发了用于DNA定量和质量评估的小型qPCR检测方法。结论:根据所需材料的质量或数量,仔细考虑提取试剂盒是必要的。在这里,我们提供了一个流程图,说明在选择提取试剂盒时要考虑的因素,以及如何准确地定量和质量控制提取的物质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Clinical Pathology
BMC Clinical Pathology Medicine-Pathology and Forensic Medicine
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: BMC Clinical Pathology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of histopathology, haematology, clinical biochemistry, and medical microbiology (including virology, parasitology, and infection control). BMC Clinical Pathology (ISSN 1472-6890) is indexed/tracked/covered by PubMed, CAS, EMBASE, Scopus and Google Scholar.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信