Päivi Lakkisto, Louise Torp Dalgaard, Thalia Belmonte, Sara-Joan Pinto-Sietsma, Yvan Devaux, David de Gonzalo-Calvo
{"title":"Development of circulating microRNA-based biomarkers for medical decision-making: a friendly reminder of what should NOT be done.","authors":"Päivi Lakkisto, Louise Torp Dalgaard, Thalia Belmonte, Sara-Joan Pinto-Sietsma, Yvan Devaux, David de Gonzalo-Calvo","doi":"10.1080/10408363.2022.2128030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Circulating cell-free microRNAs (miRNAs) represent a major reservoir for biomarker discovery. Unfortunately, their implementation in clinical practice is limited due to a profound lack of reproducibility. The great technical variability linked to major pre-analytical and analytical caveats makes the interpretation of circulating cell-free miRNA data challenging and leads to inconsistent findings. Additional efforts directed to standardization are fundamental. Several well-established protocols are currently used by independent groups worldwide. Nonetheless, there are some specific aspects in specimen collection and processing, sample handling, miRNA quantification, and data analysis that should be considered to ensure reproducibility of results. Here, we have addressed this challenge using an alternative approach. We have highlighted and discussed common pitfalls that negatively impact the robustness of circulating miRNA quantification and their application for clinical decision-making. Furthermore, we provide a checklist usable by investigators to facilitate and ensure the control of the whole miRNA quantification and analytical process. We expect that these recommendations improve the reproducibility of findings, and ultimately, facilitate the incorporation of circulating miRNA profiles into clinical practice as the next generation of disease biomarkers.</p>","PeriodicalId":10760,"journal":{"name":"Critical reviews in clinical laboratory sciences","volume":"60 2","pages":"141-152"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical reviews in clinical laboratory sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10408363.2022.2128030","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Circulating cell-free microRNAs (miRNAs) represent a major reservoir for biomarker discovery. Unfortunately, their implementation in clinical practice is limited due to a profound lack of reproducibility. The great technical variability linked to major pre-analytical and analytical caveats makes the interpretation of circulating cell-free miRNA data challenging and leads to inconsistent findings. Additional efforts directed to standardization are fundamental. Several well-established protocols are currently used by independent groups worldwide. Nonetheless, there are some specific aspects in specimen collection and processing, sample handling, miRNA quantification, and data analysis that should be considered to ensure reproducibility of results. Here, we have addressed this challenge using an alternative approach. We have highlighted and discussed common pitfalls that negatively impact the robustness of circulating miRNA quantification and their application for clinical decision-making. Furthermore, we provide a checklist usable by investigators to facilitate and ensure the control of the whole miRNA quantification and analytical process. We expect that these recommendations improve the reproducibility of findings, and ultimately, facilitate the incorporation of circulating miRNA profiles into clinical practice as the next generation of disease biomarkers.
期刊介绍:
Critical Reviews in Clinical Laboratory Sciences publishes comprehensive and high quality review articles in all areas of clinical laboratory science, including clinical biochemistry, hematology, microbiology, pathology, transfusion medicine, genetics, immunology and molecular diagnostics. The reviews critically evaluate the status of current issues in the selected areas, with a focus on clinical laboratory diagnostics and latest advances. The adjective “critical” implies a balanced synthesis of results and conclusions that are frequently contradictory and controversial.