It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Identification of target tissue microRNAs (miR) using in situ hybridization (ISH), with digoxigenin-labeled locked nucleic acid (LNA) probes, is influenced by preanalytic parameters. To determine the best retrieval method for common microRNAs, a multiblock composed of paraffin-embedded tonsil, cervix, placenta, and hyperplastic prostate tissue were included. Tissue were fixed in 10% formalin in a range of 5–144 hours (h). Cut sections (5 μm) from the multiblock were subjected to combinations of pretreatment procedures: variable periods of proteinase K (PK) digestion or Heat-induced microRNA Retrieval (HmiRR) using target retrieval solution (TRS) pH 6.1 or 9, with or without enzymatic treatment (pepsin). Results for the overall categories: TRS pH 9 versus PK; p = 2.9e−23, TRS pH 9 versus TRS pH 6.1; p = 1.1e−14, TRS pH 6.1 versus PK; p = 2.9e−03. A long fixation time, resulted in the best microRNA preservation and staining intensity (long vs. short: p = 3.5e−47, long vs. moderate: p = 1.6e−44, moderate vs. short: p = 4.3e−16), was enhanced using HmiRR TRS pH 9 with or without pepsin providing high sensitivity and specificity. These observations conflict with other ISH techniques (e.g., messenger ribonucleic acid), which typically require shorter fixation periods, and therefore, further studies are warranted.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Zealand University Hospital, Koege, Department of Clinical Immunology, Naestved, Denmark (GRID:grid.476266.7); Roskilde University, Department of Science and Environment, Roskilde, Denmark (GRID:grid.11702.35) (ISNI:0000 0001 0672 1325)
2 Zealand University Hospital, Department of Pathology, Roskilde, Denmark (GRID:grid.476266.7)
3 Roskilde University, Department of Science and Environment, Roskilde, Denmark (GRID:grid.11702.35) (ISNI:0000 0001 0672 1325); Zealand University Hospital, Department of Surgery, Koege, Denmark (GRID:grid.476266.7)
4 Zealand University Hospital, Koege, Department of Clinical Immunology, Naestved, Denmark (GRID:grid.476266.7)
5 Roskilde University, Department of Science and Environment, Roskilde, Denmark (GRID:grid.11702.35) (ISNI:0000 0001 0672 1325)