PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16042807

RNA amplification for successful gene profiling analysis.

Abstract

The study of clinical samples is often limited by the amount of material available to study. While proteins cannot be multiplied in their natural form, DNA and RNA can be amplified from small specimens and used for high-throughput analyses. Therefore, genetic studies offer the best opportunity to screen for novel insights of human pathology when little material is available. Precise estimates of DNA copy numbers in a given specimen are necessary. However, most studies investigate static variables such as the genetic background of patients or mutations within pathological specimens without a need to assess proportionality of expression among different genes throughout the genome. Comparative genomic hybridization of DNA samples represents a crude exception to this rule since genomic amplification or deletion is compared among different specimens directly. For gene expression analysis, however, it is critical to accurately estimate the proportional expression of distinct RNA transcripts since such proportions directly govern cell function by modulating protein expression. Furthermore, comparative estimates of relative RNA expression at different time points portray the response of cells to environmental stimuli, indirectly informing about broader biological events affecting a particular tissue in physiological or pathological conditions. This cognitive reaction of cells is similar to the detection of electroencephalographic patterns which inform about the status of the brain in response to external stimuli. As our need to understand human pathophysiology at the global level increases, the development and refinement of technologies for high fidelity messenger RNA amplification have become the focus of increasing interest during the past decade. The need to increase the abundance of RNA has been met not only for gene specific amplification, but, most importantly for global transcriptome wide, unbiased amplification. Now gene-specific, unbiased transcriptome wide amplification accurately maintains proportionality among all RNA species within a given specimen. This allows the utilization of clinical material obtained with minimally invasive methods such as fine needle aspirates (FNA) or cytological washings for high throughput functional genomics studies. This review provides a comprehensive and updated discussion of the literature in the subject and critically discusses the main approaches, the pitfalls and provides practical suggestions for successful unbiased amplification of the whole transcriptome in clinical samples.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ena Wang. 2005-07-25. RNA amplification for successful gene profiling analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5876-3-28

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗