↓ Skip to main content

A cross comparison of technologies for the detection of microRNAs in clinical FFPE samples of hepatoblastoma patients

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
A cross comparison of technologies for the detection of microRNAs in clinical FFPE samples of hepatoblastoma patients
Published in
Scientific Reports, June 2015
DOI 10.1038/srep10438
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Although formalin fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) tissue is a major biological source in cancer research, it is challenging to work with due to macromolecular fragmentation and nucleic acid crosslinking. Therefore, it is important to characterise the quality of data that can be obtained from FFPE samples. We have compared three independent platforms (next generation sequencing, microarray and NanoString) for profiling microRNAs (miRNAs) using clinical FFPE samples from hepatoblastoma (HB) patients. The number of detected miRNAs ranged from 228 to 345 (median=294) using the next generation sequencing platform, whereas 79 to 125 (median=112) miRNAs were identified using microarrays in three HB samples, including technical replicates. NanoString identified 299 to 372 miRNAs in two samples. Between the platforms, we observed high reproducibility and significant levels of shared detection. However, for commonly detected miRNAs, a strong correlation between platforms was not observed. Analysis of 10 additional HB samples with NanoString identified significantly overlapping miRNA expression profiles, and an alternative pattern was identified in a poorly differentiated HB with an aggressive phenotype. This investigation serves as a roadmap for future studies investigating miRNA expression in clinical FFPE samples, and as a guideline for the selection of an appropriate platform.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Denmark 1 1%
Unknown 71 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 21%
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Professor 4 5%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 9 12%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Mathematics 2 3%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 12 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 November 2015.
All research outputs
#14,264,158
of 23,305,591 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#66,167
of 125,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,347
of 268,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#896
of 1,760 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,305,591 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 125,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.3. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,189 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,760 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.