RNA Extraction from Archival Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded Tissue: A Comparison of Manual, Semiautomated, and Fully Automated Purification Methods

Author:

Bohmann Kerstin1,Hennig Guido1,Rogel Uwe2,Poremba Christopher3,Mueller Berit Maria4,Fritz Peter5,Stoerkel Stephan6,Schaefer Karl-L2

Affiliation:

1. Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Products, Molecular Research Germany, Cologne, Germany

2. Institute of Pathology, Heinrich-Heine University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany

3. Center for Histology, Cytology and Molecular Diagnostics, Trier, Germany

4. Institute of Pathology, Charité Hospital, Campus Mitte, Berlin, Germany

5. Institute of Pathology, Robert Bosch Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany

6. Institute of Pathology, HELIOS Klinikum Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany

Abstract

Abstract Background: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor material represents a valuable resource for the analysis of RNA-based biomarkers, both in research laboratories and in routine clinical testing. A robust and automated RNA-extraction method with a high sample throughput is required. Methods: We evaluated extraction performance for 4 silica-based RNA-extraction protocols: (a) a fully automated, bead-based RNA-isolation procedure; (b) its manual counterpart; (c) a semiautomated bead-based extraction system; and (d) a manual column-based extraction kit. RNA from 360 sections (90 sections per extraction method) of 30 FFPE tumor blocks up to 20 years of age was purified and analyzed by quantitative reverse-transcription PCR for ESR1 (estrogen receptor 1), PGR (progesterone receptor), ERBB2 [v-erb-b2 erythroblastic leukemia viral oncogene homolog 2, neuro/glioblastoma derived oncogene homolog (avian)], and RPL37A (ribosomal protein L37a). Results: The semiautomated protocol gave the best yield. The 3 bead-based methods showed good across-method correlations in both yield and relative mRNA amounts (r = 0.86–0.95 and 0.98, respectively). In contrast, correlations between any of the bead-based methods and the manual column-based method were worse (r = 0.77–0.95 and 0.96, respectively). The fully automated method showed the lowest variation from section to section (root mean square error, 0.32–0.35 Cq, where Cq is the quantification cycle) and required the least hands-on time (1 h). Conclusions: The fully automated RNA-purification method showed the best reproducibility in gene expression analyses of neighboring sections of tissue blocks between 3 and 20 years of age and required the least overall and hands-on times. This method appears well suited for high-throughput RNA analyses in both routine clinical testing and translational research studies with archived FFPE material.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Biochemistry, medical,Clinical Biochemistry

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3