Simultaneous extraction of mRNA and microRNA from whole blood stabilized in tempus tubes

Characteristics of RNA Stabilizer RNApro for Peripheral Blood Collection

Peripheral blood is the most practical tissue for human immune system gene expression profiling because it is easily accessible, whereas the site of primary infection in certain diseases may not be easily accessible. Due to the ex vivo instability of RNA transcripts, a key challenge in the gene expression analysis of blood samples is the rapid sample handling and stabilization of the mRNA by adding an RNA preservative (PAXgeneTM Blood RNA Tubes, TempusTM Blood RNA tubes, RNAlater Stabilization Reagent, RNAgard® Blood Tubes). BioMole (Turin, Italy) has developed a novel blood stabilizer, called RNApro, in which RNA is stabilized during phlebotomy and sample storage. In this study, RNApro performance intended as RNA yield, integrity, and stability was evaluated. Our results show that blood samples stored at -80 °C and re-extracted after 7 years show no differences in terms of quantity, quality, and amplificability. The samples in the RNAlater stabilization solution can be stored at room temperature for up to one week or at 4 °C for up to one month. Similar results can also be observed for PAXgene tubes, Tempus tubes, and RNAgard tubes. In agreement with these data, the RNApro stabilization solution preserves the RNA from degradation for up to 1 month at 4 °C and 1 week at room temperature. RNApro can be stored indifferently at -80, -20, 4 °C, or room temperature for up to 2 months after, and then could be stored at -80 °C for up to seven years. In summary, our study is the first to analyze the performance of an RNA stabilizer called RNApro. We can conclude that several studies have shown significant differences in gene expression analysis when the sample was preserved in different RNA stabilizers. Therefore, it is desirable to standardize the method of nucleic acid conservation when comparing data from transcriptomic analyses.

Whole blood RNA extraction efficiency contributes to variability in RNA sequencing data sets

Numerous methodologies are used for blood RNA extraction, and large quantitative differences in recovered RNA content are reported. We evaluated three archived data sets to determine how extraction methodologies might influence mRNA and lncRNA sequencing results. The total quantity of RNA recovered /ml of blood affects RNA sequencing by impacting the recovery of weakly expressed mRNA, and lncRNA transcripts. Transcript expression (TPM counts) plotted in relation to transcript size (base pairs, bp) revealed a 30% loss of short to midsized transcripts in some data sets. Quantitative recovery of RNA is of considerable importance, and it should be viewed more judiciously. Transcripts common to the three data sets were subsequently normalized and transcript mean TPM counts and TPM count coefficient of variation (CV) were plotted in relation to increasing transcript size. Regression analysis of mean TPM counts versus transcript size revealed negative slopes in two of the three data sets suggesting a reduction of TPM transcript counts with increasing transcript size. In the third data set, the regression slope line of mRNA transcript TPM counts approximates zero and TPM counts increased in proportion to transcript size over a range of 200 to 30,000 bp. Similarly, transcript TPM count CV values also were uniformly distributed over the range of transcript sizes. In the other data sets, the regression CV slopes increased in relation to transcript size. The recovery of weakly expressed and /or short to midsized mRNA and lncRNA transcripts varies with different RNA extraction methodologies thereby altering the fundamental sequencing relationship between transcript size and TPM counts. Our analysis identifies differences in RNA sequencing results that are dependent upon the quantity of total RNA recovery from whole blood. We propose that incomplete RNA extraction directly impacts the recovery of mRNA and lncRNA transcripts from human blood and speculate these differences contribute to the "batch" effects commonly identified between sequencing results from different archived data sets.

Technical assessment of different extraction methods and transcriptome profiling of RNA isolated from small volumes of blood

Transcriptome profiling of human whole blood is used to discover biomarkers of diseases and to assess phenotypic traits. Recently, finger-stick blood collection systems have allowed a less invasive and quicker collection of peripheral blood. Such non-invasive sampling of small volumes of blood offers practical advantages. The quality of gene expression data is strictly dependent on the steps used for the sample collection, extraction, preparation and sequencing. Here we have: (i) compared the manual and automated RNA extraction of small volumes of blood using the Tempus Spin RNA isolation kit and the MagMAX for Stabilized Blood RNA Isolation kit , respectively; and (ii) assessed the effect of TURBO DNA Free treatment on the transcriptomic data of RNA isolated from small volumes of blood. We have used the QuantSeq 3' FWD mRNA-Seq Library Prep kit to prepare RNA-seq libraries, which were sequenced on the Illumina NextSeq 500 system. The samples isolated manually displayed a higher variability in the transcriptomic data as compared to the other samples. The TURBO DNA Free treatment affected the RNA samples negatively, decreasing the RNA yield and reducing the quality and reproducibility of the transcriptomic data. We conclude that automated extraction systems should be preferred over manual extraction systems for data consistency, and that the TURBO DNA Free treatment should be avoided when working on RNA samples isolated manually from small volumes of blood.

Optimized protocol for the extraction of RNA and DNA from frozen whole blood sample stored in a single EDTA tube

Cryopreservation of whole blood is useful for DNA collection, and clinical and basic research. Blood samples in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid disodium salt (EDTA) tubes stored at − 80 °C are suitable for DNA extraction, but not for high-quality RNA extraction. Herein, a new methodology for high-quality RNA extraction from human blood samples is described. Quickly thawing frozen whole blood on aluminum blocks at room temperature could minimize RNA degradation, and improve RNA yield and quality compared with thawing the samples in a 37 °C water bath. Furthermore, the use of the NucleoSpin RNA kit increased RNA yield by fivefold compared with the PAXgene Blood RNA Kit. Thawing blood samples on aluminum blocks significantly increased the DNA yield by ~ 20% compared with thawing in a 37 °C water bath or on ice. Moreover, by thawing on aluminum blocks and using the NucleoSpin RNA and QIAamp DNA Blood kits, the extraction of RNA and DNA of sufficient quality and quantity was achieved from frozen EDTA whole blood samples that were stored for up to 8.5 years. Thus, extracting RNA from frozen whole blood in EDTA tubes after long-term storage is feasible. These findings may help advance gene expression analysis, as well as biomarker research for various diseases.

An Analytically and Diagnostically Sensitive RNA Extraction and RT-qPCR Protocol for Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells

Reliable extraction and sensitive detection of RNA from human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) is critical for a broad spectrum of immunology research and clinical diagnostics. RNA analysis platforms are dependent upon high-quality and high-quantity RNA; however, sensitive detection of specific responses associated with high-quality RNA extractions from human samples with limited PBMCs can be challenging. Furthermore, the comparative sensitivity between RNA quantification and best-practice protein quantification is poorly defined. Therefore, we provide herein a critical evaluation of the wide variety of current generation of RNA-based kits for PBMCs, representative of several strategies designed to maximize sensitivity. We assess these kits with a reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) assay optimized for both analytically and diagnostically sensitive cell-based RNA-based applications. Specifically, three RNA extraction kits, one post-extraction RNA purification/concentration kit, four SYBR master-mix kits, and four reverse transcription kits were tested. RNA extraction and RT-qPCR reaction efficiency were evaluated with commonly used reference and cytokine genes. Significant variation in RNA expression of reference genes was apparent, and absolute quantification based on cell number was established as an effective RT-qPCR normalization strategy. We defined an optimized RNA extraction and RT-qPCR protocol with an analytical sensitivity capable of single cell RNA detection. The diagnostic sensitivity of this assay was sufficient to show a CD8⁺ T cell peptide epitope hierarchy with as few as 1 × 10⁴ cells. Finally, we compared our optimized RNA extraction and RT-qPCR protocol with current best-practice immune assays and demonstrated that our assay is a sensitive alternative to protein-based assays for peptide-specific responses, especially with limited PBMCs number. This protocol with high analytical and diagnostic sensitivity has broad applicability for both primary research and clinical practice.

Comparison of procedures for RNA-extraction from peripheral blood mononuclear cells

RNA quality and quantity are important factors for ensuring the accuracy of gene expression analysis and other RNA-based downstream applications. Thus far, only a limited number of methodological studies have compared sample storage and RNA extraction procedures for human cells. We compared three commercially available RNA extraction kits, i.e., (NucliSENS) easyMAG, RNeasy (Mini Kit) and RiboPure (RNA Purification Kit–blood). In addition, additional conditions, such as storage medium and storage temperature of human peripheral blood mononuclear cells were evaluated, i.e., 4 °C for RNAlater or -80 °C for QIAzol and for the respective cognate lysis buffers; easyMAG, RNeasy or RiboPure. RNA was extracted from aliquots that had been stored for one day (Run 1) or 83 days (Run 2). After DNase treatment, quantity and quality of RNA were assessed by means of a NanoDrop spectrophotometer, 2100 Bioanalyzer and RT-qPCR for the ACTB reference gene. We observed that high-quality RNA can be obtained using RNeasy and RiboPure, regardless of the storage medium, whereas samples stored in RNAlater resulted in the least amount of RNA extracted. In addition, RiboPure combined with storage of samples in its cognate lysis buffer yielded twice as much RNA as all other procedures. These results were supported by RT-qPCR and by the reproducibility observed for two independent extraction runs.

Evaluation of RNA purification methods by using different blood stabilization tubes: identification of key features for epidemiological studies

Objective

Peripheral blood is the most promising source of RNA biomarkers for diagnostic and epidemiological studies, because the presence of disease and prognostic information is reflected in the gene expression pattern. Quality RNA is used by a number of different downstream applications, so the selection of the most appropriate RNA stabilization and purification method is important. We have analyzed the RNA purified from 300 blood samples from 25 donors processed by two technicians using three methodologies with Tempus and PaxGene tubes.

Results

The best quality sample results were obtained with the Tempus Spin RNA Isolation Kit and the PaxGene Blood miRNA Kit, although larger amounts of RNA were obtained with the Tempus Spin RNA Isolation Kit. Lower Cq values were observed for RNA and miRNA genes in samples that were tested with PaxGene Blood miRNA Kit and Tempus Spin RNA Isolation Kit respectively. We identify the Tempus Spin RNA Isolation Kit as the most robust methodology, whilst the MagMax for Stabilized Blood Tubes RNA Isolation Kit showed the most instability. For biobanks, which process a large cohort and conduct epidemiological studies, the Tempus Spin RNA Isolation Kit is the most appropriate methodology. The study demonstrates the robustness of real-life procedures.