This paper reports on the use of a high-throughput diagnostic genetic screening for coagulation, platelet, or thrombotic disorders in a series of more than 2000 patients.
BackgroundWhole blood expression profiling is frequently performed using PAXgene (Qiagen) or Tempus (Life Technologies) tubes. Here, we compare 6 novel generation RNA isolation protocols with respect to RNA quantity, quality and recovery of mRNA and miRNA.Methods3 PAXgene and 3 Tempus Tubes were collected from participants of the LIFE study with (n = 12) and without (n = 35) acute myocardial infarction (AMI). RNA was extracted with 4 manual protocols from Qiagen (PAXgene Blood miRNA Kit), Life Technologies (MagMAX for Stabilized Blood Tubes RNA Isolation Kit), and Norgen Biotek (Norgen Preserved Blood RNA Purification Kit I and Kit II), and 2 (semi-)automated protocols on the QIAsymphony (Qiagen) and MagMAX Express-96 Magnetic Particle Processor (Life Technologies). RNA quantity and quality was determined. For biological validation, RNA from 12 representative probands, extracted with all 6 kits (n = 72), was reverse transcribed and mRNAs (matrix metalloproteinase 9, arginase 1) and miRNAs (miR133a, miR1), shown to be altered by AMI, were analyzed.ResultsRNA yields were highest using the Norgen Kit I with Tempus Tubes and lowest using the Norgen Kit II with PAXgene. The disease status was the second major determinant of RNA yields (LIFE-AMI 11.2 vs. LIFE 6.7 µg, p<0.001) followed by the choice of blood collection tube. (Semi-)automation reduced overall RNA extraction time but did not generally reduce hands-on-time. RNA yields and quality were comparable between manual and automated extraction protocols. mRNA expression was not affected by collection tubes and RNA extraction kits but by RT/qPCR reagents with exception of the Norgen Kit II, which led to mRNA depletion. For miRNAs, expression differences related to collection tubes (miR30b), RNA isolation (Norgen Kit II), and RT/qRT reagents (miR133a) were observed.ConclusionWe demonstrate that novel generation RNA isolation kits significantly differed with respect to RNA recovery and affected miRNA but not mRNA expression profiles.
Background: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS), followed by hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), combines radical surgery with abdominal heated chemotherapy, constituting a multimodal treatment approach. Since clear standards for HIPEC conduct in colorectal carcinoma (CRC) are lacking, we aimed to provide a comprehensive structured survey. Data sources and study eligibility criteria: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, with keywords “HIPEC” and “colorectal cancer”, according to established guidelines. Articles were systematically screened, selecting 87 publications complemented by 48 publications identified through extended search for subsequent synthesis and evaluation, extracting inter alia details on used drugs, dosage, temperature, exposure times, and carrier solutions. Results: Compiled publications contained 171 reports on HIPEC conduct foremost with mitomycin C and oxaliplatin, but also other drugs and drug combinations, comprising at least 60 different procedures. We hence provide an overview of interconnections between HIPEC protocols, used drugs and carrier solutions as well as their volumes. In addition, HIPEC temperatures and dosing benchmarks, as well as an estimate of in vivo resulting drug concentrations are demonstrated. Conclusions and implications: Owing to recent developments, HIPEC conduct and practices need to be reassessed. Unfortunately, imprecise and lacking reporting is frequent, which is why minimal information requirements should be established for HIPEC and the introduction of final drug concentrations for comparability reasons seems sensible.
The bioactivity of peritoneal perfusates ex vivo is a useful parameter for evaluating the actual cytotoxic potential of OX and its derivatives used in HIPEC over time, overcoming important limitations and disadvantages associated with respective drug monitoring only. Ex vivo cytotoxicity assays may be a promising tool to aid guiding future standardization and harmonization of HIPEC protocols based on drug-mediated effects.
Telomeres are located at chromosome ends and their length (TL) has been associated with aging and human diseases such as cancer. Whole blood DNA is frequently used for TL measurements but the influence of preanalytical conditions and DNA isolation methods on TL quantification has not been thoroughly investigated. To evaluate potential preanalytical as well as methodological bias on TL, anonymized leftover EDTA-whole blood samples were pooled according to leukocyte counts and were incubated with and without actinomycin D to induce apoptosis as a prototype of sample degradation. DNA was isolated from fresh blood pools and after freezing at -80°C. Commercially available kits using beads (Invitrogen), spin columns (Qiagen, Macherey-Nagel and 5prime) or precipitation (Stratec/Invisorb) and a published isopropanol precipitation protocol (IPP) were used for DNA isolation. TL was assessed by qPCR, and normalized to the single copy reference gene 36B4 using two established single-plex and a new multiplex protocol. We show that the method of DNA isolation significantly affected TL (e.g. 1.86-fold longer TL when comparing IPP vs. Invitrogen). Sample degradation led to an average TL decrease of 22% when using all except for one DNA isolation method (5prime). Preanalytical storage conditions did not affect TL with exception of samples that were isolated with the 5prime kit, where a 27% increase in TL was observed after freezing. Finally, performance of the multiplex qPCR protocol was comparable to the single-plex assays, but showed superior time- and cost-effectiveness and required > 80% less DNA. Findings of the current study highlight the need for standardization of whole blood processing and DNA isolation in clinical study settings to avoid preanalytical bias of TL quantification and show that multiplex assays may improve TL/SCG measurements.
ObjectivesThis study was designed to identify the multivariate effect of clinical risk factors on high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) and 12 months major adverse events (MACE) under treatment with aspirin and clopidogrel in patients undergoing non-urgent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Methods739 consecutive patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing PCI were recruited. On-treatment platelet aggregation was tested by light transmittance aggregometry. Clinical risk factors and MACE during one-year follow-up were recorded. An independent population of 591 patients served as validation cohort.ResultsDegree of on-treatment platelet aggregation was influenced by different clinical risk factors. In multivariate regression analysis older age, diabetes mellitus, elevated BMI, renal function and left ventricular ejection fraction were independent predictors of HPR. After weighing these variables according to their estimates in multivariate regression model, we developed a score to predict HPR in stable CAD patients undergoing elective PCI (PREDICT-STABLE Score, ranging 0-9). Patients with a high score were significantly more likely to develop MACE within one year of follow-up, 3.4% (score 0-3), 6.3% (score 4-6) and 10.3% (score 7-9); odds ratio 3.23, P=0.02 for score 7-9 vs. 0-3. This association was confirmed in the validation cohort.ConclusionsVariability of on-treatment platelet function and associated outcome is mainly influenced by clinical risk variables. Identification of high risk patients (e.g. with high PREDICT-STABLE score) might help to identify risk groups that benefit from more intensified antiplatelet regimen. Additional clinical risk factor assessment rather than isolated platelet function-guided approaches should be investigated in future to evaluate personalized antiplatelet therapy in stable CAD-patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.