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...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2025-07-01
|
| Series: | Molecular Oncology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.13705 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849702282907615232 |
|---|---|
| author | 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 |
| author_facet | 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 |
| author_sort | Volga M Saini |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | 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. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-0b788ee647874946a0ef4b2db05d9290 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 1574-7891 1878-0261 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-07-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Molecular Oncology |
| spelling | doaj-art-0b788ee647874946a0ef4b2db05d92902025-08-20T03:17:43ZengWileyMolecular Oncology1574-78911878-02612025-07-011972014203710.1002/1878-0261.13705A comparative study of circulating tumor cell isolation and enumeration technologies in lung cancerVolga M Saini0Ezgi Oner1Mark P. Ward2Sinead Hurley3Brian David Henderson4Faye Lewis5Stephen P. Finn6Gerard J. Fitzmaurice7John J. O'Leary8Sharon O'Toole9Lorraine O'Driscoll10Kathy Gately11Thoracic Oncology Research Group, Trinity Translational Medicine Institute St James's Hospital Dublin IrelandThoracic Oncology Research Group, Trinity Translational Medicine Institute St James's Hospital Dublin IrelandTrinity St. James's Cancer Institute Trinity College Dublin IrelandThoracic Oncology Research Group, Trinity Translational Medicine Institute St James's Hospital Dublin IrelandTrinity St. James's Cancer Institute Trinity College Dublin IrelandTrinity St. James's Cancer Institute Trinity College Dublin IrelandThoracic Oncology Research Group, Trinity Translational Medicine Institute St James's Hospital Dublin IrelandDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery St James's Hospital Dublin IrelandTrinity St. James's Cancer Institute Trinity College Dublin IrelandTrinity St. James's Cancer Institute Trinity College Dublin IrelandTrinity St. James's Cancer Institute Trinity College Dublin IrelandThoracic Oncology Research Group, Trinity Translational Medicine Institute St James's Hospital Dublin IrelandCirculating 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.https://doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.13705CellMag™circulating tumor cellsEasySep™non–small cell lung cancerParsortix®RosetteSep™ |
| spellingShingle | 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 A comparative study of circulating tumor cell isolation and enumeration technologies in lung cancer Molecular Oncology CellMag™ circulating tumor cells EasySep™ non–small cell lung cancer Parsortix® RosetteSep™ |
| title | A comparative study of circulating tumor cell isolation and enumeration technologies in lung cancer |
| title_full | A comparative study of circulating tumor cell isolation and enumeration technologies in lung cancer |
| title_fullStr | A comparative study of circulating tumor cell isolation and enumeration technologies in lung cancer |
| title_full_unstemmed | A comparative study of circulating tumor cell isolation and enumeration technologies in lung cancer |
| title_short | A comparative study of circulating tumor cell isolation and enumeration technologies in lung cancer |
| title_sort | comparative study of circulating tumor cell isolation and enumeration technologies in lung cancer |
| topic | CellMag™ circulating tumor cells EasySep™ non–small cell lung cancer Parsortix® RosetteSep™ |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.13705 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT volgamsaini acomparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT ezgioner acomparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT markpward acomparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT sineadhurley acomparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT briandavidhenderson acomparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT fayelewis acomparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT stephenpfinn acomparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT gerardjfitzmaurice acomparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT johnjoleary acomparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT sharonotoole acomparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT lorraineodriscoll acomparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT kathygately acomparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT volgamsaini comparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT ezgioner comparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT markpward comparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT sineadhurley comparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT briandavidhenderson comparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT fayelewis comparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT stephenpfinn comparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT gerardjfitzmaurice comparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT johnjoleary comparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT sharonotoole comparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT lorraineodriscoll comparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer AT kathygately comparativestudyofcirculatingtumorcellisolationandenumerationtechnologiesinlungcancer |