Suppr超能文献

从乳腺癌组织中分离用于流式细胞术的高质量和高数量miRNA及单细胞悬液的方法:一项比较分析

Methods for Isolation of High Quality and Quantity of miRNA and Single Cell Suspension for Flow-Cytometry from Breast Cancer Tissue: A Comparative Analysis.

作者信息

Dwivedi Shailendra, Purohit Purvi, Misra Radhieka, Pareek Puneet, Vishnoi Jeewan Ram, Misra Sanjeev, Sharma Praveen

机构信息

1Department of Biochemistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, 342005 India.

2Era's Lucknow Medical College and Hospital, Lucknow, 226003 India.

出版信息

Indian J Clin Biochem. 2019 Jan;34(1):39-44. doi: 10.1007/s12291-017-0719-5. Epub 2017 Nov 29.

Abstract

Inadequate methods may cause substantial loss not only in the quantity but also in quality of the product. This study aimed to determine the best method for making single cell suspension for isolation of RNA and flow cytometer analysis from cancer tissue. We compared two methods of tissue disruption used during RNA isolation and flow cytometer analysis. Mechanical tissue disruption method and enzymatic tissue digestion method are commonly used for making single cell suspension before RNA isolation and flow cytometer analysis. 20 resected tissue samples were dissociated into single cells by mechanical and enzymatic methods. Quality and quantity of isolated miRNA was graded by the ratio of 260/280 nm and by running gels. The results revealed that mechanical hand held tissue homogenizer showed better yield than enzymatic (719.12 ± 513.67 vs. 524.87 ± 388.18 ng/µl) and the quality 260/280 nm ratio was significantly better [2.15 ± 0.21 vs. 1.57 ± 0.23; 95% CI (0.402-0.730);  < 0.001] in mechanical method than enzymatic. However, for flow cytometer enzymatic digestion was best. The mechanical method is very suitable for isolating miRNA than enzymatic while enzymatic digestion is most favorable for flow-cytometer analysis as it reduces debris in comparison of mechanical process of shearing.

摘要

方法不当不仅可能导致产品数量大幅损失,还可能导致质量下降。本研究旨在确定从癌组织中分离RNA和进行流式细胞仪分析时制备单细胞悬液的最佳方法。我们比较了RNA分离和流式细胞仪分析过程中使用的两种组织破碎方法。在RNA分离和流式细胞仪分析之前,机械组织破碎法和酶解组织消化法常用于制备单细胞悬液。通过机械和酶解方法将20个切除的组织样本解离为单细胞。通过260/280nm的比值和跑胶对分离出的miRNA的质量和数量进行分级。结果显示,手持式机械组织匀浆器的产量高于酶解法(719.12±513.67 vs. 524.87±388.18 ng/µl),并且机械法的260/280nm质量比值显著优于酶解法[2.15±0.21 vs. 1.57±0.23;95%CI(0.402 - 0.730);P<0.001]。然而,对于流式细胞仪分析,酶解消化是最好的。与酶解过程相比,机械法在分离miRNA方面比酶解法更合适,而酶解消化最有利于流式细胞仪分析,因为它减少了剪切机械过程中的碎片。

相似文献

9
Comparative flow DNA analysis of different cell suspensions in breast carcinoma.
Cytometry. 1984 May;5(3):263-7. doi: 10.1002/cyto.990050308.

引用本文的文献

6
Stem Cell Biology: A New Hope in Regenerations and Replenishments Therapy.干细胞生物学:再生与补充疗法的新希望。
Indian J Clin Biochem. 2018 Oct;33(4):369-371. doi: 10.1007/s12291-018-0792-4. Epub 2018 Sep 26.
7
Tissue-Resident Memory Cells: New Marked Shield to Fight Cancers.组织驻留记忆细胞:对抗癌症的新型标记护盾
Indian J Clin Biochem. 2018 Apr;33(2):119-120. doi: 10.1007/s12291-018-0745-y. Epub 2018 Mar 7.

本文引用的文献

1
Diseases and Molecular Diagnostics: A Step Closer to Precision Medicine.疾病与分子诊断:向精准医学迈进一大步。
Indian J Clin Biochem. 2017 Oct;32(4):374-398. doi: 10.1007/s12291-017-0688-8. Epub 2017 Aug 22.
10
Quantitative real-time RT-PCR--a perspective.定量实时逆转录聚合酶链反应——综述
J Mol Endocrinol. 2005 Jun;34(3):597-601. doi: 10.1677/jme.1.01755.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验