2006
DOI: 10.1038/nbt0906-1071
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Replacing cRNA targets with cDNA reduces microarray cross-hybridization

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
55
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
2
55
0
Order By: Relevance
“…cRNA targets have been shown to produce lower perfect match/mismatch discrimination scored than cDNA targets and therefore many elements are not called present with cRNA targets despite having signals significantly above the background. Several publications address this observation including the publications by Barker et al 25 and Eklund et al 26 More information is being gained from less input RNA using this new method. This is supported by the higher percent present calls and also the selection of statistically significant genes that discriminate the two biological subtypes of DLBCL (ABC and GCB).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…cRNA targets have been shown to produce lower perfect match/mismatch discrimination scored than cDNA targets and therefore many elements are not called present with cRNA targets despite having signals significantly above the background. Several publications address this observation including the publications by Barker et al 25 and Eklund et al 26 More information is being gained from less input RNA using this new method. This is supported by the higher percent present calls and also the selection of statistically significant genes that discriminate the two biological subtypes of DLBCL (ABC and GCB).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Expression levels of 220 human miRNAs were measured by custom quantitative PCR assays, as described previously (15,16). Transcript expression levels were detected by microarray, as described previously (17,18). Seven mice were analyzed for each treatment or control group.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This limits the ability of the method to measure the relative concentration of distinct RNAs within the same sample and requires the blot to be stripped and reprobed. Microarrays are ideal for the comparison of relative RNA concentrations within a sample, but microarrays are costly and tend, due to hybridization kinetics, to suffer from a relatively low dynamic range (Zhang et al 2005;Eklund et al 2006;MAQC Consortium et al 2006). Methods based on quantitative PCR are likely to be very sensitive but require multiple enzymatic steps and multiple pairs of oligonucleotides to achieve results.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%