{"title":"Preclinical In-House Validation of Commercially Available Fluorescence In-Situ Hybridization Probes Used in Diagnosis of Haematological Malignancies","authors":"D. Shetty, E. Talker, H. Jain","doi":"10.31487/j.ejmc.2020.01.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"World Health Organization states the importance of conventional cytogenetics and FISH in hematological\nmalignancy for accurate diagnosis, treatment and monitoring response to therapy. Most FISH probes,\nhowever, are Analyte- Specific reagents (not FDA approved) and thus an elaborate validation procedure\nprior to diagnostic use becomes essential. This study focuses on validating FISH probes by assessing the\nanalyte- sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, precision and determining normal reference ranges (cut-offs).\nEight probes from two different manufacturers each were validated using cytogenetically normal peripheral\nblood (negative controls) and leukemia positive bone marrow samples (positive controls) to determine the\nmost suitable probe for use in a diagnostic set-up. Both the controls were cytogenetically defined before\ninitiating the validation procedure. Alongside this, the probe constructs were studied to understand signal\nco-localization, size and intensity. Accuracy was determined by metaphase FISH, precision by standard\ndeviation or inter-observer variability and analyte specificity and sensitivity using standard formulae. The\ncut-off or the normal reference range was derived by BETAINV function in Microsoft Excel. Based on\nperformance characteristics and qualitative data most relevant probes were suggested for diagnostic use.\nAlthough validation procedures may differ between test centres, it should be a mandate pre-clinical practice.\nA validated FISH probe surges dependability on generated reports and this study presents the most\nrudimentary yet essential parameters in a FISH probe validation.","PeriodicalId":377302,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Molecular Cancer","volume":"286 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Molecular Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31487/j.ejmc.2020.01.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
World Health Organization states the importance of conventional cytogenetics and FISH in hematological
malignancy for accurate diagnosis, treatment and monitoring response to therapy. Most FISH probes,
however, are Analyte- Specific reagents (not FDA approved) and thus an elaborate validation procedure
prior to diagnostic use becomes essential. This study focuses on validating FISH probes by assessing the
analyte- sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, precision and determining normal reference ranges (cut-offs).
Eight probes from two different manufacturers each were validated using cytogenetically normal peripheral
blood (negative controls) and leukemia positive bone marrow samples (positive controls) to determine the
most suitable probe for use in a diagnostic set-up. Both the controls were cytogenetically defined before
initiating the validation procedure. Alongside this, the probe constructs were studied to understand signal
co-localization, size and intensity. Accuracy was determined by metaphase FISH, precision by standard
deviation or inter-observer variability and analyte specificity and sensitivity using standard formulae. The
cut-off or the normal reference range was derived by BETAINV function in Microsoft Excel. Based on
performance characteristics and qualitative data most relevant probes were suggested for diagnostic use.
Although validation procedures may differ between test centres, it should be a mandate pre-clinical practice.
A validated FISH probe surges dependability on generated reports and this study presents the most
rudimentary yet essential parameters in a FISH probe validation.