Peripheral Blood gene expression is widely used in the discovery of biomarkers and development of therapeutics. Recently, a spate of commercial blood collection and preservation systems have been introduced with proprietary variations that may differentially impact the transcriptomic profiles. Comparative analysis of these collection platforms will help optimize protocols to detect, identify, and reproducibly validate true biological variance among subjects. In the current study, we tested two recently introduced whole blood collection methods, RNAgard® and PAXgene™ RNA, in addition to the traditional method of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) separated from whole blood and preserved in Trizol reagent. Study results revealed striking differences in the transcriptomic profiles from the three different methods that imply ex vivo changes in gene expression occurred during the blood collection, preservation, and mRNA extraction processes. When comparing the ability of the three preservation methods to accurately capture individuals’ expression differences, RNAgard® outperformed PAXgene™ RNA, and both showed significantly better individual separation of transcriptomic profiles than PBMCs. Hence, our study recommends using a single blood collection platform, and strongly cautions against combining methods during the course of a defined study.
Overall design
Peripheral blood was collected from eight healthy volunteers. Three comparitive groups for each subject, namely, blood preserved in PAXgene™ RNA tube, RNAgard® Blood Tube and CPT tube. Biological replicates (per subject): 3 RNAgard® Blood Tubes, 2 PAXgene™ RNA tubes and 3 CPT tubes (reference group).
Less...
More...