肺癌循环肿瘤细胞分离和计数技术比较研究

IF 6.6 2区 医学 Q1 Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Volga M Saini, Ezgi Oner, Mark P Ward, Sinead Hurley, Brian David Henderson, Faye Lewis, Stephen P Finn, Gerard J Fitzmaurice, John J O'Leary, Sharon O'Toole, Lorraine O'Driscoll, Kathy Gately
{"title":"肺癌循环肿瘤细胞分离和计数技术比较研究","authors":"Volga M Saini, Ezgi Oner, Mark P Ward, Sinead Hurley, Brian David Henderson, Faye Lewis, Stephen P Finn, Gerard J Fitzmaurice, John J O'Leary, Sharon O'Toole, Lorraine O'Driscoll, Kathy Gately","doi":"10.1002/1878-0261.13705","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have potential as diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive biomarkers in solid tumors. Despite Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of CTC devices in various cancers, the rarity and heterogeneity of CTCs in lung cancer make them technically challenging to isolate and analyze, hindering their clinical integration. Establishing a consensus through comparative analysis of different CTC systems is warranted. This study aimed to evaluate seven different CTC enrichment methods across five technologies using a standardized spike-in protocol: the CellMag™ (EpCAM-dependent enrichment), EasySep™ and RosetteSep™ (blood cell depletion), and the Parsortix® PR1 and the new design Parsortix® Prototype (PP) (size- and deformability-based enrichment). The Parsortix® systems were also evaluated for any differences in recovery rates between cell harvest versus in-cassette staining. Healthy donor blood (5 mL) was spiked with 100 fluorescently labeled EpCAM<sup>high</sup> H1975 cells, processed through each system, and the isolation efficiency was calculated. The CellMag™ had the highest recovery rate (70 ± 14%), followed by Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining, while the EasySep™ had the lowest recovery (18 ± 8%). Additional spike-in experiments were performed with EpCAM<sup>moderate</sup> A549 and EpCAM<sup>low</sup> H1299 cells using the CellMag™ and Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining. The recovery rate of CellMag™ significantly reduced to 35 ± 14% with A549 cells and 1 ± 1% with H1299 cells. However, the Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining showed cell phenotype-independent and consistent recovery rates among all lung cancer cell lines: H1975 (49 ± 2%), A549 (47 ± 10%), and H1299 (52 ± 10%). Furthermore, we demonstrated that the Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining method is capable of isolating heterogeneous single CTCs and cell clusters from patient samples. The Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining, capable of isolating different phenotypes of CTCs as either single cells or cell clusters with consistent recovery rates, is considered optimal for CTC enrichment for lung cancer, albeit needing further optimization and validation.</p>","PeriodicalId":18764,"journal":{"name":"Molecular Oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study of circulating tumor cell isolation and enumeration technologies in lung cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Volga M Saini, Ezgi Oner, Mark P Ward, Sinead Hurley, Brian David Henderson, Faye Lewis, Stephen P Finn, Gerard J Fitzmaurice, John J O'Leary, Sharon O'Toole, Lorraine O'Driscoll, Kathy Gately\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/1878-0261.13705\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have potential as diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive biomarkers in solid tumors. Despite Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of CTC devices in various cancers, the rarity and heterogeneity of CTCs in lung cancer make them technically challenging to isolate and analyze, hindering their clinical integration. Establishing a consensus through comparative analysis of different CTC systems is warranted. This study aimed to evaluate seven different CTC enrichment methods across five technologies using a standardized spike-in protocol: the CellMag™ (EpCAM-dependent enrichment), EasySep™ and RosetteSep™ (blood cell depletion), and the Parsortix® PR1 and the new design Parsortix® Prototype (PP) (size- and deformability-based enrichment). The Parsortix® systems were also evaluated for any differences in recovery rates between cell harvest versus in-cassette staining. Healthy donor blood (5 mL) was spiked with 100 fluorescently labeled EpCAM<sup>high</sup> H1975 cells, processed through each system, and the isolation efficiency was calculated. The CellMag™ had the highest recovery rate (70 ± 14%), followed by Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining, while the EasySep™ had the lowest recovery (18 ± 8%). Additional spike-in experiments were performed with EpCAM<sup>moderate</sup> A549 and EpCAM<sup>low</sup> H1299 cells using the CellMag™ and Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining. The recovery rate of CellMag™ significantly reduced to 35 ± 14% with A549 cells and 1 ± 1% with H1299 cells. However, the Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining showed cell phenotype-independent and consistent recovery rates among all lung cancer cell lines: H1975 (49 ± 2%), A549 (47 ± 10%), and H1299 (52 ± 10%). Furthermore, we demonstrated that the Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining method is capable of isolating heterogeneous single CTCs and cell clusters from patient samples. The Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining, capable of isolating different phenotypes of CTCs as either single cells or cell clusters with consistent recovery rates, is considered optimal for CTC enrichment for lung cancer, albeit needing further optimization and validation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18764,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Molecular Oncology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Molecular Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.13705\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Molecular Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.13705","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

循环肿瘤细胞(CTCs)具有作为实体瘤诊断、预后和预测生物标记物的潜力。尽管美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)批准了用于各种癌症的 CTC 装置,但肺癌中 CTC 的稀有性和异质性使其在分离和分析技术上具有挑战性,从而阻碍了它们的临床整合。有必要通过对不同 CTC 系统的比较分析达成共识。本研究的目的是使用标准化尖峰方案评估五种技术中七种不同的 CTC 富集方法:CellMag™(EpCAM 依赖性富集)、EasySep™ 和 RosetteSep™(血细胞耗竭)以及 Parsortix® PR1 和新设计的 Parsortix® Prototype (PP)(基于大小和变形的富集)。此外,还评估了 Parsortix® 系统的细胞采集回收率与盒内染色回收率之间的差异。健康捐献者的血液(5 mL)中加入 100 个荧光标记的 EpCAMhigh H1975 细胞,通过每个系统进行处理,并计算分离效率。CellMag™ 的回收率最高(70 ± 14%),其次是 Parsortix® PR1 卡式染色法,而 EasySep™ 的回收率最低(18 ± 8%)。使用 CellMag™ 和 Parsortix® PR1 卡式染色法对 EpCAMmoderate A549 和 EpCAMlow H1299 细胞进行了额外的尖峰实验。对于 A549 细胞,CellMag™ 的回收率明显降低至 35 ± 14%,对于 H1299 细胞,回收率为 1 ± 1%。然而,Parsortix® PR1 盒内染色显示所有肺癌细胞系的细胞表型无关,且回收率一致:H1975(49 ± 2%)、A549(47 ± 10%)和 H1299(52 ± 10%)。此外,我们还证明了 Parsortix® PR1 盒内染色法能够从患者样本中分离出异质性单个 CTC 和细胞簇。Parsortix® PR1 卡式染色法能以一致的回收率分离出不同表型的单细胞或细胞簇 CTC,被认为是肺癌 CTC 富集的最佳方法,但仍需进一步优化和验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparative study of circulating tumor cell isolation and enumeration technologies in lung cancer.

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) have potential as diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive biomarkers in solid tumors. Despite Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of CTC devices in various cancers, the rarity and heterogeneity of CTCs in lung cancer make them technically challenging to isolate and analyze, hindering their clinical integration. Establishing a consensus through comparative analysis of different CTC systems is warranted. This study aimed to evaluate seven different CTC enrichment methods across five technologies using a standardized spike-in protocol: the CellMag™ (EpCAM-dependent enrichment), EasySep™ and RosetteSep™ (blood cell depletion), and the Parsortix® PR1 and the new design Parsortix® Prototype (PP) (size- and deformability-based enrichment). The Parsortix® systems were also evaluated for any differences in recovery rates between cell harvest versus in-cassette staining. Healthy donor blood (5 mL) was spiked with 100 fluorescently labeled EpCAMhigh H1975 cells, processed through each system, and the isolation efficiency was calculated. The CellMag™ had the highest recovery rate (70 ± 14%), followed by Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining, while the EasySep™ had the lowest recovery (18 ± 8%). Additional spike-in experiments were performed with EpCAMmoderate A549 and EpCAMlow H1299 cells using the CellMag™ and Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining. The recovery rate of CellMag™ significantly reduced to 35 ± 14% with A549 cells and 1 ± 1% with H1299 cells. However, the Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining showed cell phenotype-independent and consistent recovery rates among all lung cancer cell lines: H1975 (49 ± 2%), A549 (47 ± 10%), and H1299 (52 ± 10%). Furthermore, we demonstrated that the Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining method is capable of isolating heterogeneous single CTCs and cell clusters from patient samples. The Parsortix® PR1 in-cassette staining, capable of isolating different phenotypes of CTCs as either single cells or cell clusters with consistent recovery rates, is considered optimal for CTC enrichment for lung cancer, albeit needing further optimization and validation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Molecular Oncology
Molecular Oncology Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Molecular Medicine
CiteScore
11.80
自引率
1.50%
发文量
203
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Molecular Oncology highlights new discoveries, approaches, and technical developments, in basic, clinical and discovery-driven translational cancer research. It publishes research articles, reviews (by invitation only), and timely science policy articles. The journal is now fully Open Access with all articles published over the past 10 years freely available.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信