REVIEW
Cytological preparations for molecular analysis: A review of technical procedures, advantages and limitations for referring samples for testing
G. da Cunha Santos,
M. A. Saieg,
G. Troncone,
P. Zeppa,
Corresponding Author
G. da Cunha Santos
Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
Laboratory Medicine Program, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
Correspondence
G. da Cunha Santos, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, USA.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorM. A. Saieg
Department of Pathology, Santa Casa Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
Department of Pathology, AC Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, Brazil
Search for more papers by this authorG. Troncone
Department of Public Health, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
Search for more papers by this authorP. Zeppa
Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy
Search for more papers by this authorG. da Cunha Santos,
M. A. Saieg,
G. Troncone,
P. Zeppa,
Corresponding Author
G. da Cunha Santos
Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
Laboratory Medicine Program, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
Correspondence
G. da Cunha Santos, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, USA.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorM. A. Saieg
Department of Pathology, Santa Casa Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
Department of Pathology, AC Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, Brazil
Search for more papers by this authorG. Troncone
Department of Public Health, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
Search for more papers by this authorP. Zeppa
Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy
Search for more papers by this authorThe authors have equally contributed to this manuscript.
Abstract
Minimally invasive procedures such as endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) must yield not only good quality and quantity of material for morphological assessment, but also an adequate sample for analysis of molecular markers to guide patients to appropriate targeted therapies. In this context, cytopathologists worldwide should be familiar with minimum requirements for refereeing cytological samples for testing. The present manuscript is a review with comprehensive description of the content of the workshop entitled Cytological preparations for molecular analysis: pre-analytical issues for EBUS TBNA, presented at the 40th European Congress of Cytopathology in Liverpool, UK. The present review emphasises the advantages and limitations of different types of cytology substrates used for molecular analysis such as archival smears, liquid-based preparations, archival cytospin preparations and FTA (Flinders Technology Associates) cards, as well as their technical requirements/features. These various types of cytological specimens can be successfully used for an extensive array of molecular studies, but the quality and quantity of extracted nucleic acids rely directly on adequate pre-analytical assessment of those samples. In this setting, cytopathologists must not only be familiar with the different types of specimens and associated technical procedures, but also correctly handle the material provided by minimally invasive procedures, ensuring that there is sufficient amount of material for a precise diagnosis and correct management of the patient through personalised care.
Abstract
The success of molecular analysis lies in the optimum quality of the genetic material that may be obtained from smears, cytospin preparations, liquid-based cytology and cell blocks. Each of these procedures has advantages and drawbacks in terms of efficacy, costs, standardization and infrastructure requirements. The structure of this review includes those cytology substrates and discusses their use for molecular analysis, explores the technical procedures (or requirements) that can be employed to achieve adequate DNA recovery and provides an analysis of their advantages and limitations.
REFERENCES
- 1Bellevicine C, Malapelle U, Vigliar E, Pisapia P, Vita G, Troncone G. How to prepare cytological samples for molecular testing. J Clin Pathol. 2017; 70: 819-826.
- 2da Cunha Santos G, Saieg MA. Preanalytic specimen triage: smears, cell blocks, cytospin preparations, transport media, and cytobanking. Cancer. 2017; 125: 455-464.
- 3Roy-Chowdhuri S, Aisner DL, Allen TC, et al. Biomarker testing in lung carcinoma cytology specimens: a perspective from members of the pulmonary pathology society. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2016; 140: 1267-1272.
- 4Crapanzano JP, Heymann JJ, Monaco S, Nassar A, Saqi A. The state of cell block variation and satisfaction in the era of molecular diagnostics and personalized medicine. Cytojournal. 2014; 11: 7.
- 5Bellevicine C, Malapelle U, de Luca C, Iaccarino A, Troncone G. EGFR analysis: current evidence and future directions. Diagn Cytopathol. 2014; 42: 984-992.
- 6Roy-Chowdhuri S, Chow CW, Kane MK, et al. Optimizing the DNA yield for molecular analysis from cytologic preparations. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016; 124: 254-260.
- 7Shi Q, Ibrahim A, Herbert K, et al. Detection of BRAF mutations on direct smears of thyroid fine-needle aspirates through cell transfer technique. Am J Clin Pathol. 2015; 143: 500-504.
- 8Wu HH, Eaton JP, Jones KJ, et al. Utilization of cell-transferred cytologic smears in detection of EGFR and KRAS mutation on adenocarcinoma of lung. Mod Pathol. 2014; 27: 930-935.
- 9Knoepp SM, Roh MH. Ancillary techniques on direct-smear aspirate slides: a significant evolution for cytopathology techniques. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013; 121: 120-128.
- 10Killian JK, Walker RL, Suuriniemi M, et al. Archival fine-needle aspiration cytopathology (FNAC) samples: untapped resource for clinical molecular profiling. J Mol Diagn. 2010; 12: 739-745.
- 11Dejmek A, Zendehrokh N, Tomaszewska M, Edsjo A. Preparation of DNA from cytological material: effects of fixation, staining, and mounting medium on DNA yield and quality. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013; 121: 344-353.
- 12Baum JE, Zhang P, Hoda RS, et al. Accuracy of next-generation sequencing for the identification of clinically relevant variants in cytology smears in lung adenocarcinoma. Cancer. 2017; 125: 398-406.
- 13Hookim K, Roh MH, Willman J, et al. Application of immunocytochemistry and BRAF mutational analysis to direct smears of metastatic melanoma. Cancer Cytopathol. 2012; 120: 52-61.
- 14da Cunha Santos G, Schroder M, Zhu JB, et al. Minimizing delays in DNA retrieval: the “freezer method” for glass coverslip removal. Letter to the editor regarding comparative study of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation analysis on cytology smears and surgical pathology specimens from primary and metastatic lung carcinomas. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013; 121: 533.
- 15Rao A, Khode R, Sayage-Rabie L. Reply to comparative study of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation analysis on cytology smears and surgical pathology specimens from primary and metastatic lung carcinomas. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013; 121: 534.
- 16Santos Gda C, Saieg MA, Ko HM, et al. Multiplex sequencing for EZH2, CD79B, and MYD88 mutations using archival cytospin preparations from B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma aspirates previously tested for MYC rearrangement and IGH/BCL2 translocation. Cancer Cytopathol. 2015; 123: 413-420.
- 17Roy-Chowdhuri S, Goswami RS, Chen H, et al. Factors affecting the success of next-generation sequencing in cytology specimens. Cancer Cytopathol. 2015; 123: 659-668.
- 18Jain D, Mathur SR, Iyer VK. Cell blocks in cytopathology: a review of preparative methods, utility in diagnosis and role in ancillary studies. Cytopathology. 2014; 25: 356-371.
- 19da Cunha Santos G, Ko HM, Geddie WR, et al. Targeted use of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in cytospin preparations: results of 298 fine needle aspirates of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Cancer Cytopathol. 2010; 118: 250-258.
- 20Ali AE, Morgen EK, Geddie WR, et al. Classifying B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma by using MIB-1 proliferative index in fine-needle aspirates. Cancer Cytopathol. 2010; 118: 166-172.
- 21Ko HM, da Cunha Santos G, Darling G, et al. Diagnosis and subclassification of lymphomas and non-neoplastic lesions involving mediastinal lymph nodes using endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration. Diagn Cytopathol. 2013; 41: 1023-1030.
- 22Armstrong G, Szallasi A, Biegel JA, et al. Early molecular detection of central nervous system relapse in a child with systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma: case report and review of the literature. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2005; 44: 400-406.
- 23Ke Z, Lai Y, Ma X, Lil S, Huang W. Diagnosis of bladder cancer from the voided urine specimens using multi-target fluorescence in situ hybridization. Oncol Lett. 2014; 7: 325-330.
- 24Saieg MA, Geddie WR, Boerner SL, et al. The use of FTA cards for preserving unfixed cytological material for high-throughput molecular analysis. Cancer Cytopathol. 2012; 120: 206-214.
- 25Natu S, Hoffman J, Siddiqui M, Hobday C, Shrimankar J, Harrison R. The role of endobronchial ultrasound guided transbronchial needle aspiration cytology in the investigation of mediastinal lymphadenopathy and masses, the North Tees experience. J Clin Pathol. 2010; 63: 445-451.
- 26Bellevicine C, Malapelle U, Vigliar E, de Luca C, Troncone G. Epidermal growth factor receptor test performed on liquid-based cytology lung samples: experience of an academic referral center. Acta Cytol. 2014; 58: 589-594.
- 27Malapelle U, de Rosa N, Rocco D, et al. EGFR and KRAS mutations detection on lung cancer liquid-based cytology: a pilot study. J Clin Pathol. 2012; 65: 87-91.
- 28Malapelle U, de Rosa N, Bellevicine C, et al. EGFR mutations detection on liquid-based cytology: is microscopy still necessary? J Clin Pathol. 2012; 65: 561-564.
- 29Bridge JA. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction molecular testing of cytology specimens: pre-analytic and analytic factors. Cancer. 2017; 125: 11-19.
- 30Keedy VL, Temin S, Somerfield MR, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology provisional clinical opinion: epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation testing for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer considering first-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29: 2121-2127.
- 31Lindeman NI, Cagle PT, Beasley MB, et al. Molecular testing guideline for selection of lung cancer patients for EGFR and ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors: guideline from the College of American Pathologists, International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and Association for Molecular Pathology. J Thorac Oncol. 2013; 8: 823-859.
- 32Dietel M, Bubendorf L, Dingemans AM, et al. Diagnostic procedures for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): recommendations of the European Expert Group. Thorax. 2016; 71: 177-184.
- 33Tian SK, Killian JK, Rekhtman N, et al. Optimizing workflows and processing of cytologic samples for comprehensive analysis by next-generation sequencing: memorial sloan kettering cancer center experience. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2016; 140: 1200-1205.
- 34Balassanian R, Wool GD, Ono JC, et al. A superior method for cell block preparation for fine-needle aspiration biopsies. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016; 124: 508-518.
- 35da Cunha Santos G, Wyeth T, Reid A, et al. A proposal for cellularity assessment for EGFR mutational analysis with a correlation with DNA yield and evaluation of the number of sections obtained from cell blocks for immunohistochemistry in non-small cell lung carcinoma. J Clin Pathol. 2016; 69: 607-611.
- 36Fritzsche FR, Bode PK, Moch H, Kristiansen G, Varga Z, Bode B. Determination of the Her-2/neu gene amplification status in cytologic breast cancer specimens using automated silver-enhanced in-situ hybridization (SISH). Am J Surg Pathol. 2010; 34: 1180-1185.
- 37Garady C, Saieg MA, Ko HM, Geddie WR, Boerner SL, da Cunha Santos G. Epstein-Barr virus encoded RNA detected by in situ hybridization using cytological preparations. Cytopathology. 2014; 25: 101-107.
- 38Coley SM, Crapanzano JP, Saqi A. FNA, core biopsy, or both for the diagnosis of lung carcinoma: obtaining sufficient tissue for a specific diagnosis and molecular testing. Cancer Cytopathol. 2015; 123: 318-326.
- 39Navani N, Brown JM, Nankivell M, et al. Suitability of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration specimens for subtyping and genotyping of non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter study of 774 patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012; 185: 1316-1322.
- 40Shiau CJ, Babwah JP, da Cunha Santos G, et al. Sample features associated with success rates in population-based EGFR mutation testing. J Thorac Oncol. 2014; 9: 947-956.
- 41Chowdhuri SR, Xi L, Pham TH, et al. EGFR and KRAS mutation analysis in cytologic samples of lung adenocarcinoma enabled by laser capture microdissection. Mod Pathol. 2012; 25: 548-555.
- 42Heinmoller E, Liu Q, Sun Y, et al. Toward efficient analysis of mutations in single cells from ethanol-fixed, paraffin-embedded, and immunohistochemically stained tissues. Lab Invest. 2002; 82: 443-453.
- 43Sauter JL, Grogg KL, Vrana JA, Law ME, Halvorson JL, Henry MR. Young investigator challenge: validation and optimization of immunohistochemistry protocols for use on Cellient cell block specimens. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016; 124: 89-100.
- 44Kinsella MD, Birdsong GG, Siddiqui MT, Cohen C, Hanley KZ. Immunohistochemical detection of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 in formalin-fixed breast carcinoma cell block preparations: correlation of results to corresponding tissue block (needle core and excision) samples. Diagn Cytopathol. 2013; 41: 192-198.
- 45Hartman AK, Gorman BK, Chakraborty S, Mody DR, Schwartz MR. Determination of HER2/neu status: a pilot study comparing HER2/neu dual in situ hybridization DNA probe cocktail assay performed on cell blocks to immunohistochemisty and fluorescence in situ hybridization performed on histologic specimens. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014; 138: 553-558.
- 46Beau-Faller M, Degeorges A, Rolland E, et al. Cross-validation study for epidermal growth factor receptor and KRAS mutation detection in 74 blinded non-small cell lung carcinoma samples: a total of 5550 exons sequenced by 15 molecular French laboratories (evaluation of the EGFR mutation status for the administration of EGFR-TKIs in non-small cell lung carcinoma [ERMETIC] project–part 1). J Thorac Oncol. 2011; 6: 1006-1015.
- 47Shi Y, Au JS, Thongprasert S, et al. A prospective, molecular epidemiology study of EGFR mutations in Asian patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer of adenocarcinoma histology (PIONEER). J Thorac Oncol. 2014; 9: 154-162.
- 48Allegrini S, Antona J, Mezzapelle R, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor gene analysis with a highly sensitive molecular assay in routine cytologic specimens of lung adenocarcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012; 138: 377-381.
- 49Do H, Dobrovic A. Sequence artifacts in DNA from formalin-fixed tissues: causes and strategies for minimization. Clin Chem. 2015; 61: 64-71.
- 50Srinivasan M, Sedmak D, Jewell S. Effect of fixatives and tissue processing on the content and integrity of nucleic acids. Am J Pathol. 2002; 161: 1961-1971.
- 51Williams C, Ponten F, Moberg C, et al. A high frequency of sequence alterations is due to formalin fixation of archival specimens. Am J Pathol. 1999; 155: 1467-1471.
- 52Stigt JA, tHart NA, Knol AJ, Uil SM, Groen HJ. Pyrosequencing analysis of EGFR and KRAS mutations in EUS and EBUS-derived cytologic samples of adenocarcinomas of the lung. J Thorac Oncol. 2013; 8: 1012-1018.
- 53Spencer DH, Sehn JK, Abel HJ, Watson MA, Pfeifer JD, Duncavage EJ. Comparison of clinical targeted next-generation sequence data from formalin-fixed and fresh-frozen tissue specimens. J Mol Diagn. 2013; 15: 623-633.
- 54Roy-Chowdhuri S, Chen H, Singh RR, et al. Concurrent fine needle aspirations and core needle biopsies: a comparative study of substrates for next-generation sequencing in solid organ malignancies. Mod Pathol. 2017; 30: 499-508.
- 55Chen L, Liu P, Evans TC Jr, Ettwiller LM. DNA damage is a pervasive cause of sequencing errors, directly confounding variant identification. Science. 2017; 355: 752-756.
- 56da Cunha Santos G, Liu N, Tsao MS, Kamel-Reid S, Chin K, Geddie WR. Detection of EGFR and KRAS mutations in fine-needle aspirates stored on Whatman FTA cards: is this the tool for biobanking cytological samples in the molecular era? Cancer Cytopathol. 2010; 118: 450-456.
- 57Peluso AL, Cascone AM, Lucchese L, et al. Use of FTA cards for the storage of breast carcinoma nucleic acid on fine-needle aspiration samples. Cancer Cytopathol. 2015; 123: 582-592.
- 58Peluso AL, Cozzolino I, Bottiglieri A, et al. Immunoglobulin heavy and light chains and T-cell receptor beta and gamma chains PCR assessment on cytological samples. A study comparing FTA cards and cryopreserved lymph node fine-needle cytology. Cytopathology. 2017; 28: 203-215.
- 59Peluso AL, Ieni A, Mignogna C, Zeppa P. Lymph node fine-needle cytology: beyond flow cytometry. Acta Cytol. 2016; 60: 372-384.
- 60Caputo V, Picariello C, Lucchese L, Selleri C, Zeppa P, Peluso AL. Nucleic acid storage on FTA cards from cytological samples. Cytopathology. 2017; 28: 440-441.
- 61Biswal JK, Subramaniam S, Ranjan R, Pattnaik B. Evaluation of FTA((R)) card for the rescue of infectious foot-and-mouth disease virus by chemical transfection of extracted RNA in cultured cells. Mol Cell Probes. 2016; 30: 225-230.
- 62Yang Y, Garver LS, Bingham KM, et al. Feasibility of using the mosquito blood meal for rapid and efficient human and animal virus surveillance and discovery. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2015; 93: 1377-1382.
- 63Marques AP, Ze-Ze L, San-Romao MV, Tenreiro R. A novel molecular method for identification of Oenococcus oeni and its specific detection in wine. Int J Food Microbiol. 2010; 142: 251-255.
- 64Al-Kzayer LF, Sakashita K, Matsuda K, et al. Genetic evaluation of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia in Iraq using FTA cards. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2012; 59: 461-467.
- 65Galaal K, Meirovitz M, Hussain R, et al. The feasibility of storing ovarian tumor cells on databasing paper: establishing a library of ovarian cancer DNA. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2007; 17: 94-100.
Citing Literature
