Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33961658›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Evaluation of a marker independent isolation method for circulating tumor cells in esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Annouck Philippron, Lieven Depypere, Steffi Oeyen, Bram De Laere, Charlotte Vandeputte, Philippe Nafteux, Katleen De Preter, Piet Pattyn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Technologies for Viable Circulating Tumor Cell Isolation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Annouck PhilippronDepartment of Gastro-Intestinal Surgery, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-1589-5217
Lieven DepypereDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8230-5649
Steffi OeyenCenter for Oncological Research (CORE), Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Bram De LaereCancer Research Institute (CRIG), Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Charlotte VandeputteCenter for Medical Genetics, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Philippe NafteuxDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Katleen De PreterCenter for Medical Genetics, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Piet PattynDepartment of Gastro-Intestinal Surgery, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-1139-3394
Ghent University Hospital · BEKU Leuven · BEKarolinska Institutet · SEUniversity of Antwerp · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe enrichment of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from blood provides a minimally invasive method for biomarker discovery in cancer. Longitudinal interrogation allows monitoring or prediction of therapy response, detection of minimal residual disease or progression, and determination of prognosis. Despite inherent phenotypic heterogeneity and differences in cell surface marker expression, most CTC isolation technologies typically use positive selection. This necessitates the optimization of marker-independent CTC methods, enabling the capture of heterogenous CTCs. The aim of this report is to compare a size-dependent and a marker-dependent CTC-isolation method, using spiked esophageal cells in healthy donor blood and blood from patients diagnosed with esophageal adenocarcinoma.

methodsUsing esophageal cancer cell lines (OE19 and OE33) spiked into blood of a healthy donor, we investigated tumor cell isolation by Parsortix post cell fixation, immunostaining and transfer to a glass slide, and benchmarked its performance against the CellSearch system. Additionally, we performed DEPArray cell sorting to infer the feasibility to select and isolate cells of interest, aiming towards downstream single-cell molecular characterization in future studies. Finally, we measured CTC prevalence by Parsortix in venous blood samples from patients with various esophageal adenocarcinoma tumor stages.

resultsOE19 and OE33 cells were spiked in healthy donor blood and subsequently processed using CellSearch (n = 16) or Parsortix (n = 16). Upon tumor cell enrichment and enumeration, the recovery rate ranged from 76.3 ± 23.2% to 21.3 ± 9.2% for CellSearch and Parsortix, respectively. Parsortix-enriched and stained cell fractions were successfully transferred to the DEPArray instrument with preservation of cell morphology, allowing isolation of cells of interest. Finally, despite low CTC prevalence and abundance, Parsortix detected traditional CTCs (i.e. cytokeratin+/CD45-) in 8/29 (27.6%) of patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma, of whom 50% had early stage (I-II) disease.

conclusionsWe refined an epitope-independent isolation workflow to study CTCs in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. CTC recovery using Parsortix was substantially lower compared to CellSearch when focusing on the traditional CTC phenotype with CD45-negative and cytokeratin-positive staining characteristics. Future research could determine if this method allows downstream molecular interrogation of CTCs to infer new prognostic and predictive biomarkers on a single-cell level.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkers, TumorCell Line, TumorCell SeparationEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingNeoplastic Cells, CirculatingPrognosisBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID33961658
PMCPMC8104412
OpenAlexW3157046488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.