Biochemistry and Immunology, Lillebaelt Hospital, Kolding and Vejle, Denmark.
Department of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Kolding, Denmark.
PLoS One. 2018 Jul 19;13(7):e0201069. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201069. eCollection 2018.
Numerous studies have reported a potential role for circulating microRNAs as biomarkers in a wide variety of diseases. However, there is a critical reproducibility challenge some of which might be due to differences in preanalytical and/or analytical factors. Thus, in the current study we systematically investigated the impact of selected preanalytical and analytical variables on the measured microRNA levels in plasma. Similar levels of microRNA were found in platelet-poor plasma obtained by dual compared to prolonged single centrifugation. In contrast, poor correlation was observed between measurements in standard plasma compared to platelet-poor plasma. The correlation between quantitative real-time PCR and droplet digital PCR was found to be good, contrary to TaqMan Low Density Array and single TaqMan assays where no correlation could be demonstrated. Dependent on the specific microRNA measured and the normalization strategy used, the intra- and inter-assay variation of quantitative real-time PCR were found to be 4.2-6.8% and 10.5-31.4%, respectively. Using droplet digital PCR the intra-assay variation was 4.4-20.1%, and the inter-assay variation 5.7-26.7%. Plasma preparation and microRNA purification were found to account for 39-73% of the total intra-assay variation, dependent on the microRNA measured and the normalization strategy used. In conclusion, our study highlighted the importance of reporting comprehensive methodological information when publishing, allowing others to perform validation studies where preanalytical and analytical variables as causes for divergent results can be minimized. Furthermore, if microRNAs are to become routinely used diagnostic or prognostic biomarkers, the differences in plasma microRNA levels between health and diseased subjects must exceed the high preanalytical and analytical variability.
大量研究报告称,循环 microRNA 作为多种疾病的生物标志物具有潜在作用。然而,存在一个关键的可重复性挑战,其中一些可能是由于分析前和/或分析因素的差异所致。因此,在本研究中,我们系统地研究了选定的分析前和分析变量对血浆中测量的 microRNA 水平的影响。与长时间的单一离心相比,通过双重离心获得的血小板少血浆中的 microRNA 水平相似。相比之下,在标准血浆与血小板少血浆之间观察到测量值之间的相关性较差。与 TaqMan 低密度阵列和单个 TaqMan 测定法相反,定量实时 PCR 和液滴数字 PCR 之间的相关性良好,在这些方法中无法证明相关性。取决于所测量的特定 microRNA 和使用的归一化策略,定量实时 PCR 的内和间试验变异性分别为 4.2-6.8%和 10.5-31.4%。使用液滴数字 PCR,内试验变异性为 4.4-20.1%,间试验变异性为 5.7-26.7%。根据所测量的 microRNA 和使用的归一化策略,发现血浆制备和 microRNA 纯化分别占总内试验变异性的 39-73%。总之,我们的研究强调了在发表时报告全面的方法学信息的重要性,使其他人能够进行验证研究,其中可以最小化分析前和分析变量作为导致结果差异的原因。此外,如果 microRNA 要成为常规使用的诊断或预后生物标志物,则健康和患病受试者之间血浆 microRNA 水平的差异必须超过高分析前和分析变异性。