Identification of circulating tumor cells captured by the FDA-cleared Parsortix® PC1 system from the peripheral blood of metastatic breast cancer patients using immunofluorescence and cytopathological evaluations

Abstract

AbstractCirculating Tumor Cells (CTCs) may serve as a non-invasive source of tumor material to investigate an individual’s disease in real-time. The Parsortix® PC1 System, the first FDA-cleared medical device for the capture and harvest of CTCs from peripheral blood of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients for use in subsequent user-validated downstream analyses, enables the epitope-independent capture of CTCs with diverse phenotypes based on cell size and deformability. The aim of this study was to determine the proportion of MBC patients and self-declared female healthy volunteers (HVs) that had CTCs identified using immunofluorescence (IF) or Wright-Giemsa (WG) staining. Peripheral blood from 76 HVs and 76 MBC patients was processed on Parsortix® PC1 Systems. Harvested cells were cytospun onto a charged slide and immunofluorescently stained for identification of CTCs expressing epithelial markers. The IF slides were subsequently WG-stained and analyzed for CTC identification based on morphological features of malignant cells. All testing was performed by operators blinded to the clinical status of each subject. CTCs were identified on the IF slides in 45.3% (≥ 1) / 24.0% (≥ 5) of the MBC patients (range = 0 – 125, mean = 7) and in 6.9% (≥ 1) / 2.8% (≥ 5) of the HVs (range = 0 – 28, mean = 1). Among the MBC patients with ≥ 1 CTC, 70.6% had only CK + /EpCAM- CTCs, with none having EpCAM + /CK- CTCs. CTC clusters were identified in 56.0% of the CTC-positive patients. On the WG-stained slides, CTCs were identified in 42.9% (≥ 1) / 21.4% (≥ 5) of the MBC patients (range = 0 – 41, mean = 4) and 4.3% (≥ 1) / 2.9% (≥ 5) of the HVs (range = 0 – 14, mean = 0). This study demonstrated the ability of the Parsortix® PC1 System to capture and harvest CTCs from a significantly larger proportion of MBC patients compared to HVs when coupled with both IF and WG cytomorphological assessment. The presence of epithelial cells in subjects without diagnosed disease has been previously described, with their significance being unclear. Interestingly, a high proportion of the identified CTCs did not express EpCAM, highlighting the limitations of using EpCAM-based approaches.