Molecular Pathology Techniques

Overview of Molecular Testing of Cytology Specimens

OBJECTIVE

Utilizing cytology specimens for molecular testing has attracted increasing attention in the era of personalized medicine. Cytology specimens are clinically easier to access. The samples can be quickly and completely fixed in a very short time of fixation before tissue degradation occurs, compared to hours or days of fixation in surgical pathology specimens. In addition, cytology specimens can be fixed without formalin, which can significantly damage DNA and RNA. All these factors contribute to the superb quality of DNA and RNA in cytology specimens for molecular tests.

STUDY DESIGN

We summarize the most pertinent information in the literature regarding molecular testing in the field of cytopathology.

RESULTS

The first part focuses on the types of cytological specimens that can be used for molecular testing, including the advantages and limitations. The second section describes the common molecular tests and their clinical application.

CONCLUSION

Various types of cytology specimens are suitable for many molecular tests, which may require additional clinical laboratory validation.

The genus Aeromonas: A general approach

The genus Aeromonas comprises more than thirty Gram-negative bacterial species which mostly act as opportunistic microorganisms. These bacteria are distributed naturally in diverse aquatic ecosystems, where they are easily isolated from animals such as fish and crustaceans. A capacity for adaptation also makes Aeromonas able to colonize terrestrial environments and their inhabitants, so these microorganisms can be identified from different sources, such as soils, plants, fruits, vegetables, birds, reptiles, amphibians, among others. Infectious processes usually develop in immunocompromised humans; in fish and other marine animals this process occurs under conditions of stress. Such events are most often associated with incorrect practices in aquaculture. Aeromonas has element diverse ranges, denominated virulence factors, which promote adhesion, colonization and invasion into host cells. These virulence factors, such as membrane components, enzymes and toxins, for example, are differentially expressed among species, making some strains more virulent than others. Due to their diversity, no single virulence factor was considered determinant in the infectious process generated by these microorganisms. Unlike other genera, Aeromonas species are erroneously differentiated by conventional biochemical tests. Therefore, molecular assays are necessary for this purpose. Nevertheless, new means of identification have been considered in order to generate methods that, like molecular tests, can correctly identify these microorganisms. The main objectives of this review are to explain environmental and structural characteristics of the Aeromonas genus and to discuss virulence mechanisms that these bacteria use to infect aquatic organisms and humans, which are important aspects for aquaculture and public health, respectively. In addition, this review aims to clarify new tests for the precise identification of the species of Aeromonas, contributing to the exact and specific diagnosis of infections by these microorganisms and consequently the treatment.

Risk for molecular contamination of tissue samples evaluated for targeted anti-cancer therapy

With the increasing usage of sensitive PCR technology for pharmacogenetics, cross contamination becomes a significant concern. Researchers employed techniques which basically include replacing laboratory equipment after each sample preparation; however, there are no recommended guidelines. In the present work we wanted to evaluate the risk of cross contamination during tissue processing using the routine precaution measures. Twenty-one surgical samples of lung adenocarcinoma were used, of which 7 contained EGFR exon 19 mutation, 7 contained EGFR exon 21 mutation (p.L858R) and 7 were EGFR wild-type. The samples were ordered by alternating the mutation group to maximize the potential for cross contamination and underwent tissue sectioning and de-paraffinization. The entire process was performed using the same tools. Following DNA extraction all samples underwent PCR amplification and were scrutinized for small fractions of EGFR mutation using deep sequencing with the Ion torrent PGM technology. Twenty samples yielded results. The fraction of mutated copies was 41 ± 23% (range 11–66) for the cases with known exon 19 mutation and 48±24% (range 0–65) for the cases with known exon 21 mutations. No in-frame exon 19 deletion mutations were identified in the wild-type (WT) and exon 21 groups. The fraction of EGFR exon 21 (codon 858) mutations was 0.018±0.014% (range 0–0.05%) in the WT and exon 19 groups, which was not statistically different than the background sequencing artifact noise for the same base-pair alteration (p = 0.21). Our results suggest that standard precautions are sufficient for molecular pathology diagnosis of surgical samples and are not associated with increased risk of cross contamination.