Gene expression profiling of whole blood: A comparative assessment of RNA-stabilizing collection methods
Peripheral Blood gene expression is widely used in the discovery of biomarkers and development of therapeutics. Recently, a spate of commercial blood collection and preservation systems have been introduced with proprietary variations that may differentially impact the transcriptomic profiles. Compa...
Saved in:
Published in | PloS one Vol. 14; no. 10; p. e0223065 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
United States
Public Library of Science
10.10.2019
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Peripheral Blood gene expression is widely used in the discovery of biomarkers and development of therapeutics. Recently, a spate of commercial blood collection and preservation systems have been introduced with proprietary variations that may differentially impact the transcriptomic profiles. Comparative analysis of these collection platforms will help optimize protocols to detect, identify, and reproducibly validate true biological variance among subjects. In the current study, we tested two recently introduced whole blood collection methods, RNAgard® and PAXgene® RNA, in addition to the traditional method of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) separated from whole blood and preserved in Trizol reagent. Study results revealed striking differences in the transcriptomic profiles from the three different methods that imply ex vivo changes in gene expression occurred during the blood collection, preservation, and mRNA extraction processes. When comparing the ability of the three preservation methods to accurately capture individuals' expression differences, RNAgard® outperformed PAXgene® RNA, and both showed better individual separation of transcriptomic profiles than PBMCs. Hence, our study recommends using a single blood collection platform, and strongly cautions against combining methods during the course of a defined study. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 Competing Interests: The views, opinions, and/or findings contained in this report are those of the authors and should not be construed as official Department of the Army position, policy, or decision, unless so designated by other official documentation. Citations of commercial organizations or trade names in this report do not constitute an official Department of the Army endorsement or approval of the products or services of these organizations. |
ISSN: | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
DOI: | 10.1371/journal.pone.0223065 |