PLoS ONE (Jan 2020)

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

  • Antonio Rodríguez,
  • Hans Duyvejonck,
  • Jonas D Van Belleghem,
  • Tessa Gryp,
  • Leen Van Simaey,
  • Stefan Vermeulen,
  • Els Van Mechelen,
  • Mario Vaneechoutte

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229423
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 15, no. 2
p. e0229423

Abstract

Read online

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.