Abstract
RNA quality is critical to achieve valid results in microarray experiments and to save resources. The RNA integrity number (RIN) can be measured with minimal sample consumption by microfluidics-based capillary electrophoresis. To determine whether RIN can predict the qualitative outcome of microarray hybridization, we measured RIN in total RNA samples from 484 different experiments by the 2100 Bioanalyzer system and correlated with the percentage of present calls (%pc) of downstream oligonucleotide microarrays. The correlation coefficient for RNA and %pc in all 408 samples for which the bioanalyzer algorithm was able to produce an RIN was 0.475 (p < 0.05), ranging from 0.039 to 0.673 for different tissue- and assay-type subgroups. Multivariate analysis found RIN to be the best predictor of microarray quality as assessed by %pc, outperforming the 28S to 18S ratio. For a %pc threshold of 25% and 35%, we determined optimal cut points for RIN at 7.15 and 8.05, respectively. Using the suggested cut points, RIN can support the final decision whether a certain RNA sample is appropriate for successful microarray hybridization.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Schoor O, Weinschenk T, Hennenlotter J, Corvin S, Stenzl A, Rammensee HG, Stevanović S (2003) Moderate degradation does not preclude microarray analysis of small amounts of RNA. Biotechniques 35(6):1192–1201
Mueller O, Hahnenberger K, Dittmann M, Yee H, Dubrow R, Nagle R, Ilsley D (2000) A microfluidic system for high-speed reproducible DNA sizing and quantitation. Electrophoresis 21:128–134. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1522-2683(20000101)21:1<128::AID-ELPS128>3.0.CO;2-M
Schroeder A, Mueller O, Stocker S, Salowsky R, Leiber M, Gassmann M, Lightfoot S, Menzel W, Granzow M, Ragg T (2006) The RIN: an RNA integrity number for assigning integrity values to RNA measurements. BMC Mol Biol 7:3. doi:10.1186/1471-2199-7-3
Liu WM, Mei R, Di X, Ryder TB, Hubbell E, Dee S, Webster TA, Harrington CA, Ho MH, Baid J, Smeekens SP (2002) Analysis of high density expression microarrays with signed-rank call algorithms. Bioinformatics 18:1593–1599. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/18.12.1593
Finkelstein DB (2005) Trends in the quality of data from 5168 oligonucleotide microarrays from a single facility. J Biomol Tech 16:143–153
Tumor Analysis Best Practices Working Group (2004) Expression profiling—best practices for data generation and interpretation in clinical trials. Nat Rev Genet 5:229–237. doi:10.1038/nrg1297
Weis S, Llenos IC, Dulay JR, Elashoff M, Martínez-Murillo F, Miller CL (2007) Quality control for microarray analysis of human brain samples: the impact of postmortem factors, RNA characteristics, and histopathology. J Neurosci Methods 165:198–209. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.06.001
Staal FJ, Cario G, Cazzaniga G, Haferlach T, Heuser M, Hofmann WK, Mills K, Schrappe M, Stanulla M, Wingen LU, van Dongen JJ, Schlegelberger B (2006) Consensus guidelines for microarray gene expression analyses in leukemia from three European leukemia networks. Leukemia 20:1385–1392. doi:10.1038/sj.leu.2404274
Hofmann WK, de Vos S, Komor M, Hoelzer D, Wachsman W, Koeffler HP (2002) Characterization of gene expression of CD34+ cells from normal and myelodysplastic bone marrow. Blood 100:3553–3560. doi:10.1182/blood.V100.10.3553
Copois V, Bibeau F, Bascoul-Mollevi C, Salvetat N, Chalbos P, Bareil C, Candeil L, Fraslon C, Conseiller E, Granci V, Mazière P, Kramar A, Ychou M, Pau B, Martineau P, Molina F, Del Rio M (2007) Impact of RNA degradation on gene expression profiles: assessment of different methods to reliably determine RNA quality. J Biotechnol 127:549–559. doi:10.1016/j.jbiotec.2006.07.032
Auer H, Lyianarachchi S, Newsom D, Klisovic MI, Marcucci G, Kornacker K (2003) Chipping away at the chip bias: RNA degradation in microarray analysis. Nat Genet 35:292–293. doi:10.1038/ng1203-292
Strand C, Enell J, Hedenfalk I, Fernö M (2007) RNA quality in frozen breast cancer samples and the influence on gene expression analysis—a comparison of three evaluation methods using microcapillary electrophoresis traces. BMC Mol Biol 8:38. doi:10.1186/1471-2199-8-38
Jahn CE, Charkowski AO, Willis DK (2008) Evaluation of isolation methods and RNA integrity for bacterial RNA quantitation. J Microbiol Methods 75:318–324. doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2008.07.004
McClintick JN, Jerome RE, Nicholson CR, Crabb DW, Edenberg HJ (2003) Reproducibility of oligonucleotide arrays using small samples. BMC Genomics 4:4. doi:10.1186/1471-2164-4-4
Kohlmann A, Haschke-Becher E, Wimmer B, Huber-Wechselberger A, Meyer-Monard S, Huxol H, Siegler U, Rossier M, Matthes T, Rebsamen M, Chiappe A, Diemand A, Rauhut S, Johnson A, Liu WM, Williams PM, Wieczorek L, Haferlach T (2008) Intraplatform reproducibility and technical precision of gene expression profiling in 4 laboratories investigating 160 leukemia samples: the DACH study. Clin Chem 54:1705–1715. doi:10.1373/clinchem.2008.108506
Schuchhardt J, Beule D, Malik A, Wolski E, Eickhoff H, Lehrach H, Herzel H (2000) Normalization strategies for cDNA microarrays. Nucleic Acids Res 28:E47. doi:10.1093/nar/28.10.e47
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kiewe, P., Gueller, S., Komor, M. et al. Prediction of qualitative outcome of oligonucleotide microarray hybridization by measurement of RNA integrity using the 2100 Bioanalyzer™ capillary electrophoresis system. Ann Hematol 88, 1177–1183 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00277-009-0751-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00277-009-0751-5