Heidi Schwarzenbach1, Andreia Machado da Silva2, George Calin3, Klaus Pantel4. 1. Department of Tumour Biology, Center of Experimental Medicine, University Cancer Center Hamburg, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; 2. Department of Experimental Therapeutics and The Center for RNA Interference and Non-Coding RNAs, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Instituto de Investigação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal; INEB, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal. 3. Department of Experimental Therapeutics and The Center for RNA Interference and Non-Coding RNAs, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; 4. Department of Tumour Biology, Center of Experimental Medicine, University Cancer Center Hamburg, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; pantel@uke.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Different technologies, such as quantitative real-time PCR or microarrays, have been developed to measure microRNA (miRNA) expression levels. Quantification of miRNA transcripts implicates data normalization using endogenous and exogenous reference genes for data correction. However, there is no consensus about an optimal normalization strategy. The choice of a reference gene remains problematic and can have a serious impact on the actual available transcript levels and, consequently, on the biological interpretation of data. CONTENT: In this review article we discuss the reliability of the use of small RNAs, commonly reported in the literature as miRNA expression normalizers, and compare different strategies used for data normalization. SUMMARY: A workflow strategy is proposed for normalization of miRNA expression data in an attempt to provide a basis for the establishment of a global standard procedure that will allow comparison across studies.
BACKGROUND: Different technologies, such as quantitative real-time PCR or microarrays, have been developed to measure microRNA (miRNA) expression levels. Quantification of miRNA transcripts implicates data normalization using endogenous and exogenous reference genes for data correction. However, there is no consensus about an optimal normalization strategy. The choice of a reference gene remains problematic and can have a serious impact on the actual available transcript levels and, consequently, on the biological interpretation of data. CONTENT: In this review article we discuss the reliability of the use of small RNAs, commonly reported in the literature as miRNA expression normalizers, and compare different strategies used for data normalization. SUMMARY: A workflow strategy is proposed for normalization of miRNA expression data in an attempt to provide a basis for the establishment of a global standard procedure that will allow comparison across studies.
Authors: Kenneth W Witwer; Edit I Buzás; Lynne T Bemis; Adriana Bora; Cecilia Lässer; Jan Lötvall; Esther N Nolte-'t Hoen; Melissa G Piper; Sarada Sivaraman; Johan Skog; Clotilde Théry; Marca H Wauben; Fred Hochberg Journal: J Extracell Vesicles Date: 2013-05-27
Authors: Fabian Benz; Christoph Roderburg; David Vargas Cardenas; Mihael Vucur; Jérémie Gautheron; Alexander Koch; Henning Zimmermann; Jörn Janssen; Lukas Nieuwenhuijsen; Mark Luedde; Norbert Frey; Frank Tacke; Christian Trautwein; Tom Luedde Journal: Exp Mol Med Date: 2013-09-20 Impact factor: 8.718
Authors: Vasily N Aushev; Irina B Zborovskaya; Konstantin K Laktionov; Nicolas Girard; Marie-Pierre Cros; Zdenko Herceg; Vladimir Krutovskikh Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-10-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Baqer A Haider; Alexander S Baras; Matthew N McCall; Joshua A Hertel; Toby C Cornish; Marc K Halushka Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-02-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Andrew J Goodwin; Pengfei Li; Perry V Halushka; James A Cook; Aman S Sumal; Hongkuan Fan Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2020-04-22 Impact factor: 5.464
Authors: Chung Wah Wu; Xiaoming Cao; Calise K Berger; Patrick H Foote; Douglas W Mahoney; Julie A Simonson; Bradley W Anderson; Tracy C Yab; William R Taylor; Lisa A Boardman; John B Kisiel; David A Ahlquist Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2017-06-28 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Louise Benning; Samuel Robinson; Marie Follo; Lukas Andreas Heger; Daniela Stallmann; Daniel Duerschmied; Christoph Bode; Ingo Ahrens; Marcus Hortmann Journal: J Vis Exp Date: 2018-07-03 Impact factor: 1.355
Authors: Wolfgang Poller; Stefanie Dimmeler; Stephane Heymans; Tanja Zeller; Jan Haas; Mahir Karakas; David-Manuel Leistner; Philipp Jakob; Shinichi Nakagawa; Stefan Blankenberg; Stefan Engelhardt; Thomas Thum; Christian Weber; Benjamin Meder; Roger Hajjar; Ulf Landmesser Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2018-08-01 Impact factor: 29.983