Affiliation:
1. Department of Pathology Stanford University School of Medicine Stanford California USA
2. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles California USA
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundCirculating tumor cells (CTCs) shed into blood provide prognostic and/or predictive information. Previously, the authors established an assay to detect carcinoma cells from pleural fluid, termed effusion tumor cells (ETCs), by employing an immunofluorescence‐based CTC‐identification platform (RareCyte) on air‐dried unstained ThinPrep (TP) slides. To facilitate clinical integration, they evaluated different slide processing and storage conditions, hypothesizing that alternative comparable conditions for ETC detection exist.MethodsThe authors enumerated ETCs on RareCyte, using morphology and mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) cutoffs of >100 arbitrary units (a.u.) for epithelial cellular adhesion molecule (EpCAM) and <100 a.u. for CD45. They analyzed malignant pleural fluid from three patients under seven processing and/or staining conditions, three patients after short‐term storage under three conditions, and seven samples following long‐term storage at –80°C. MFI values of 4′,6‐diamidino‐2‐phenylindol, cytokeratin, CD45, and EpCAM were compared.ResultsETCs were detected in all conditions. Among the different processing conditions tested, the ethanol‐fixed, unstained TP was most similar to the previously established air‐dried, unstained TP protocol. All smears and Pap‐stained TPs had significantly different marker MFIs from the established condition. After short‐term storage, the established condition showed comparable results, but ethanol‐fixed and Pap‐stained slides showed significant differences. ETCs were detectable after long‐term storage at –80°C in comparable numbers to freshly prepared slides, but most marker MFIs were significantly different.ConclusionsIt is possible to detect ETCs under different processing and storage conditions, lending promise to the application of this method in broader settings. Because of decreased immunofluorescence‐signature distinctions between cells, morphology may need to play a larger role.