BACKGROUND: In fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) applications, the efficiency of probe hybridization is greatly enhanced by treating the cell or tissue preparation with a variety of reagents that make the target permeable while preserving important morphological features. Pretreatment protocols can be very labor intensive, adding cost to the test. The automation of specimen pretreatment eliminates human variation in the procedure through standardization of such variables as treatment times and temperatures. METHODS AND RESULTS: We developed an instrument, the VP 2000 Processor, that can process up to 50 specimens simultaneously under computer control. In this comparative FISH study of matched specimens, one set was processed according to the manual pretreatment protocol and compared with specimens processed by the VP 2000. Processed specimen types included paraffin-embedded breast tissue, uncultured amniocytes, bone marrow, peripheral-blood lymphocytes, and uroepithelial cells recovered from urine. Data show equivalent or brighter and more specific overall signal quality compared with matched manually executed controls. CONCLUSIONS: The automation of sample pretreatment for FISH provides a superior, more consistent level of performance than the manual format.
BACKGROUND: In fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) applications, the efficiency of probe hybridization is greatly enhanced by treating the cell or tissue preparation with a variety of reagents that make the target permeable while preserving important morphological features. Pretreatment protocols can be very labor intensive, adding cost to the test. The automation of specimen pretreatment eliminates human variation in the procedure through standardization of such variables as treatment times and temperatures. METHODS AND RESULTS: We developed an instrument, the VP 2000 Processor, that can process up to 50 specimens simultaneously under computer control. In this comparative FISH study of matched specimens, one set was processed according to the manual pretreatment protocol and compared with specimens processed by the VP 2000. Processed specimen types included paraffin-embedded breast tissue, uncultured amniocytes, bone marrow, peripheral-blood lymphocytes, and uroepithelial cells recovered from urine. Data show equivalent or brighter and more specific overall signal quality compared with matched manually executed controls. CONCLUSIONS: The automation of sample pretreatment for FISH provides a superior, more consistent level of performance than the manual format.
Authors: Lyndsay N Harris; Gloria Broadwater; Maysa Abu-Khalaf; David Cowan; Ann D Thor; Daniel Budman; Constance T Cirrincione; Donald A Berry; Eric P Winer; Clifford A Hudis; Daniel F Hayes; Paula Friedman; Matthew Ellis; Lynn Dressler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-05-26 Impact factor: 44.544