4.6 Article

Detection of Circulating Tumor Cells in the Diagnostic Leukapheresis Product of Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients Comparing CellSearch® and ISET

期刊

CANCERS
卷 12, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cancers12040896

关键词

DLA; CTC; NSCLC; liquid biopsy; biomarker; ISET; CellSearch

类别

资金

  1. Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) Joint Undertaking [115749]
  2. UMCG Cancer research fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) detected by CellSearch are prognostic in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but rarely found. CTCs can be extracted from the blood together with mononuclear cell populations by diagnostic leukapheresis (DLA), therefore concentrating them. However, CellSearch can only process limited DLA volumes (approximate to 2 mL). Therefore, we established a protocol to enumerate CTCs in DLA products with Isolation by SizE of Tumor cells (ISET), and compared CTC counts between CellSearch((R)) and ISET. DLA was performed in NSCLC patients who started a new therapy. With an adapted protocol, ISET could process 10 mL of DLA. CellSearch detected CTCs in a volume equaling 2 x 10(8) leukocytes (mean 2 mL). CTC counts per mL were compared. Furthermore, the live cell protocol of ISET was tested in eight patients. ISET successfully processed all DLA products-16 with the fixed cell protocol and 8 with the live cell protocol. In total, 10-20 mL of DLA was processed. ISET detected CTCs in 88% (14/16), compared to 69% (11/16, p < 0.05) with CellSearch. ISET also detected higher number of CTCs (ISET median CTC/mL = 4, interquartile range [IQR] = 2-6, CellSearch median CTC/mL = 0.9, IQR = 0-1.8, p < 0.01). Cells positive for the epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM+) per mL were detected in similar counts by both methods. Eight patients were processed with the live cell protocol. All had EpCAM+, CD45-, CD235- cells isolated by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS). Overall, ISET processed larger volumes and detected higher CTC counts compared to CellSearch. EpCAM+ CTCs were detected in comparable rates.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据