Dataset Information

Assessment of six commercial plasma small RNA isolation kits using qRT-PCR and electrophoretic separation: higher recovery of microRNA following ultracentrifugation.

ABSTRACT: Growing interest in blood-borne microRNAs (miRNAs) as biomarkers has led to the introduction of a number of commercial kits for isolating small RNAs from plasma/serum. We sought to compare the efficacy of six such kits in isolating miRNAs from either whole plasma or a plasma-derived ultracentrifugation (UC) fraction from 2 healthy volunteers with some of the results being validated in 10 additional subjects. To assess the overall yield and concentration of isolated small RNAs, we measured the levels of one spiked-in and four endogenous miRNAs by quantitative reverse transcription and polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). We also tested the performance of the Agilent Bioanalyzer small RNA assay with these RNA samples. Additionally, we tested the effects of hemolysis on measured miRNA levels in whole plasma and in the UC fraction. Both the efficiency of RNA isolation and the relative levels of specific miRNAs in different samples varied considerably between the tested extraction methods. Of all kits tested, the QIAGEN miRNeasy kits (Mini and Serum/Plasma kits) and the Macherey-Nagel NucleoSpin kit produced the highest RNA yields. The QIAGEN Exo kit produced lesser yields than what could be extracted from the UC fraction using the QIAGEN miRNeasy kits and the Macherey-Nagel NucleoSpin kit. Bioanalyzer results showed an average correlation of R 2?=?0.8 with endogenous miRNA qRT-PCR results, for sample concentrations >40?pg/µl. The levels of the endogenous miRNAs measured in the two volunteer samples were compared with those in a larger group of subjects (n?=?10) and found to be typical. Our comparison favors the use of the QIAGEN Serum/Plasma kit and the Macherey-Nagel NucleoSpin kit for plasma miRNA applications. Furthermore, extraction of miRNAs from the UC fraction results in higher yield than extraction from whole plasma.

SUBMITTER: Meerson A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6994037 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessment of six commercial plasma small RNA isolation kits using qRT-PCR and electrophoretic separation: higher recovery of microRNA following ultracentrifugation.

Meerson Ari A Ploug Thorkil T

Biology methods & protocols 20160301 1

Growing interest in blood-borne microRNAs (miRNAs) as biomarkers has led to the introduction of a number of commercial kits for isolating small RNAs from plasma/serum. We sought to compare the efficacy of six such kits in isolating miRNAs from either whole plasma or a plasma-derived ultracentrifugation (UC) fraction from 2 healthy volunteers with some of the results being validated in 10 additional subjects. To assess the overall yield and concentration of isolated small RNAs, we measured the le ...[more]

PMID: 32161781

Similar Datasets

Project description:To meet the unprecedented requirement of diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2, a large number of diagnostic kits were authorized by concerned authorities for diagnostic use within a short period of time during the initial phases of the ongoing pandemic. We undertook this study to evaluate the inter-test agreement and other key operational features of 5 such commercial kits that have been extensively used in India for routine diagnostic testing for COVID-19. The five commercial kits were evaluated, using a panel of positive and negative respiratory samples, considering the kit provided by National Institute of Virology, Indian Council of Medical Research (2019-nCoV Kit) as the reference. The positive panel comprised of individuals who fulfilled the 3 criteria of being clinically symptomatic, having history of contact with diagnosed cases and testing positive in the reference kit. The negative panel included both healthy and disease controls, the latter being drawn from individuals diagnosed with other respiratory viral infections. The same protocol of sample collection, same RNA extraction kit and same RT-PCR instrument were used for all the kits. Clinical samples were collected from a panel of 92 cases and 60 control patients, who fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The control group included equal number of healthy individuals and patients infected with other respiratory viruses (n = 30, in each group). We observed varying sensitivity and specificity among the evaluated kits, with LabGun COVID-19 RT-PCR kit showing the highest sensitivity and specificity (94% and 100% respectively), followed by TaqPath COVID-19 Combo and Allplex 2019-nCoV assays. The extent of inter-test agreement was not associated with viral loads of the samples. Poor correlation was observed between Ct values of the same genes amplified using different kits. Our findings reveal the presence of wide heterogeneity and sub-optimal inter-test agreement in the diagnostic performance of the evaluated kits and hint at the need of adopting stringent standards for fulfilling the quality assurance requirements of the COVID-19 diagnostic process.

Dataset Information

Assessment of six commercial plasma small RNA isolation kits using qRT-PCR and electrophoretic separation: higher recovery of microRNA following ultracentrifugation.

Publications

Assessment of six commercial plasma small RNA isolation kits using qRT-PCR and electrophoretic separation: higher recovery of microRNA following ultracentrifugation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets