4.5 Article

Genomic DNA extraction methods using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue

期刊

ANALYTICAL BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 486, 期 -, 页码 17-23

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ab.2015.06.029

关键词

FFPE; Adaptive focused acoustics; DNA extraction; RAPD-PCR; Array comparative genomic hybridization; aCGH

资金

  1. Research Challenge Ohio Third Frontier Grant Program
  2. IRS Qualified Therapeutic Discovery Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As new technologies come within reach for the average cytogenetic laboratory, the study of chromosome structure has become increasingly more sophisticated. Resolution has improved from karyotyping (in which whole chromosomes are discernible) to fluorescence in situ hybridization and comparative genomic hybridization (CGH, with which specific megabase regions are visualized), array-based CGH (aCGH, examining hundreds of base pairs), and next-generation sequencing (providing single base pair resolution). Whole genome next-generation sequencing remains a cost-prohibitive method for many investigators. Meanwhile, the cost of aCGH has been reduced during recent years, even as resolution has increased and protocols have simplified. However, aCGH presents its own set of unique challenges. DNA of sufficient quantity and quality to hybridize to arrays and provide meaningful results is required. This is especially difficult for DNA from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues. Here, we compare three different methods for acquiring DNA of sufficient length, purity, and amplifiability for aCGH and other downstream applications. Phenol-chloroform extraction and column-based commercial kits were compared with adaptive focused acoustics (AFA). Of the three extraction methods, AFA samples showed increased amplicon length and decreased polymerase chain reaction (PCR) failure rate. These findings support AFA as an improvement over previous DNA extraction methods for FFPE tissues. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据