Literature DB >> 27046294

Assays for Qualification and Quality Stratification of Clinical Biospecimens Used in Research: A Technical Report from the ISBER Biospecimen Science Working Group.

Fay Betsou1, Alexandre Bulla2, Sang Yun Cho3, Judith Clements4, Rodrigo Chuaqui5, Domenico Coppola6, Yvonne De Souza7, Annemieke De Wilde8, William Grizzle9, Fiorella Guadagni10, Elaine Gunter11, Stacey Heil12, Verity Hodgkinson13, Joseph Kessler14, Michael Kiehntopf15, Hee Sung Kim16, Iren Koppandi17, Katheryn Shea18, Rajeev Singh19, Marc Sobel20, Stella Somiari21, Demetri Spyropoulos22, Mars Stone23, Gunnel Tybring24, Klara Valyi-Nagy25, Gert Van den Eynden26, Lalita Wadhwa27.   

Abstract

This technical report presents quality control (QC) assays that can be performed in order to qualify clinical biospecimens that have been biobanked for use in research. Some QC assays are specific to a disease area. Some QC assays are specific to a particular downstream analytical platform. When such a qualification is not possible, QC assays are presented that can be performed to stratify clinical biospecimens according to their biomolecular quality.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biological fluid; biospecimen; cells; qualification; quality control; tissue

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27046294      PMCID: PMC5896556          DOI: 10.1089/bio.2016.0018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank        ISSN: 1947-5543            Impact factor:   2.300


Introduction

Clinical biospecimens used in research are subject to two types of laboratory analyses. The first of these is the analysis of established clinical biology/pathology parameters where reference ranges are usually known and methods are validated (e.g., CLIA or ISO15189 accreditation). Results of these analyses are necessary to support any research on novel clinically relevant biomarkers (definition of true positive and negative cases, use as a reference method). The second type is analysis of research parameters where there are usually no established reference ranges, and often methods are not validated by the laboratory as extensively as clinical biology/pathology methods.[1] Results of these analyses are used to discover novel clinical endpoint correlates (biomarkers). In vivo and in vitro pre-analytical variations have a more or less significant impact on the output of analyses, depending on the biospecimen type, the pre-analytical variable, and the analyte of interest. According to the type of analysis above, the word “significant” has a different meaning. In the first type—the analysis of clinical biology/pathology parameters—“significant” means clinically consequential at the diagnostic level. In the second type—analysis of research parameters—“significant” means statistically significant. Examples illustrating this concept are shown in Table 1.
1.

Examples Illustrating the Probable Impact of Pre-Analytical Conditions on the Analysis of Clinical or Research Parameters

Pre-analytical conditionBiospecimen typeAnalyzed parameterProbable impact on the output of analyses
Pre-centrifugation conditionsSerumClinical antibodies (e.g., anti-EBV IgG)Non-significant (clinically)
Pre-centrifugation conditionsSerumResearch cytokines (e.g., IL-8)Significant (statistically)
Pre-centrifugation conditionsCitrate plasmaResearch cytokines (e.g., IL-8)Non-significant (statistically)
Pre-centrifugation conditionsCitrate plasmaCoagulation parameters (e.g., factor V, factor VIII)Significant (clinically)
Formalin fixation timeLung tissueIHC clinical antibodies (e.g., CK7)Non-significant (clinically)
Formalin fixation timeLung tissueMutation analysis by next-generation sequencing (e.g., allele frequency <10%)Significant (not detectable mutation)
Alcohol fixation timeLung tissueMutation analysis by next-generation sequencing (e.g., allele frequency <10%)Non-significant (detectable mutation)

CK7, cytokeratin 7; EBV, Epstein–Barr virus; IgG, immunoglobulin G; IHC, immunohistochemistry; IL8, interleukin 8.

Examples Illustrating the Probable Impact of Pre-Analytical Conditions on the Analysis of Clinical or Research Parameters CK7, cytokeratin 7; EBV, Epstein–Barr virus; IgG, immunoglobulin G; IHC, immunohistochemistry; IL8, interleukin 8. In some cases, the impact may be molecule- and even epitope-specific, for example tissue ischemia time may influence specific phospho-epitopes differently. A standard biospecimen research experimental protocol has been proposed for this type of research.[2] Therefore, in all research comparing different groups of samples for biomarker discovery, it is critical that all samples are of comparable quality to avoid the introduction of uncontrolled variables and increase the power of analysis of biomarkers. There are two approaches to this end: either sample collections with careful pre-analytical annotations (SPREC),[3] or retrospective collections with appropriate quality control (QC) and sample qualification or quality stratification. A combination of the two approaches to control compliance of procedures with specified SPRECs is also possible. Biobanks underpin all three layers of biomarker discovery, validation, and use in clinical practice. In the biomarker discovery phase, biospecimens collected and processed with one Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), and corresponding to one quality category, should be used in order to avoid pre-analytical bias and increase the power of research. However, in the biomarker validation phase, biospecimens collected and processed with more than one known and documented SOPs and corresponding to more than one quality category should be used in order to validate the robustness of a biomarker to relevant pre-analytical variations. Finally, in the biomarker clinical implementation phase, biospecimens collected and processed via validated SOPs should be used in order to ensure successful and accurate clinical diagnostic results. For these reasons, during recent years, biobank managers, auditors, and funding bodies have been asking what assays can be performed in order to assess the quality of biospecimens objectively. This technical review provides answers to this question. Although gaps exist, this review shows that many tools are already available and can be used for specimen qualification.

Methods

For the purposes of this technical report, the members of the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER) Biospecimen Science Working Group held face-to-face meetings and teleconferences between 2013 and 2015. The chair of the Working Group performed a thorough literature review and compiled a list of relevant and effective QC attributes for different categories of biospecimens. This list was reviewed and complemented by members of the Working Group. When the information is based on published evidence, the corresponding reference is given. When no reference is given, the information corresponds to current practice or to the corresponding author's opinion. The following definitions were used: • Biospecimen: any biological specimen, which may be a: ○ Primary sample: specimen directly collected from the donor (e.g., whole blood, urine, solid tissue); ○ Simple derivative: sample prepared through a simple laboratory manipulation (e.g., after centrifugation of collection tubes or mechanical disruption of tissues) without the addition of chemical substances, and without cell disruption or cell selection as part of a multi-step process; or ○ Complex derivative: derivative whose isolation requires usage of multiple steps and/or addition of chemical substances (e.g., nucleic acids, proteins, lipids, sorted cells, cultured cells, immortalized cells). • Qualification: process of examination of a biospecimen or a collection of biospecimens, and verification, based on objective analytical evidence, of their suitability for research use, either in a specific disease area or on a specific downstream analytical platform. • Quality stratification: process of examination of a biospecimen or a collection of biospecimens, and their classification, based on objective analytical evidence, into distinct categories, each category corresponding to a specific in vivo biological characteristic (e.g., level of inflammation, % tumor, protein content) or to a specific ex vivo pre-analytical condition (e.g., pre-centrifugation conditions). • Biomolecular integrity: quality status of a biospecimen, reflecting whether biomolecules of interest have not undergone either statistically or clinically significant changes relative to their in vivo state/levels. • Commutability: equivalence of analytical methods, based on objective evidence. The term “qualification” is used qualitatively. Therefore, a biospecimen is or is not qualified for use in research in a specific disease area or on a specific analytical platform. The term “quality stratification” is used quantitatively. Therefore, one or more thresholds apply in order to stratify biospecimens in two or more quality categories. These quality categories correspond to defined in vivo or in vitro conditions. When qualification is not possible because of lack of relevant assays, then quality stratification can be made. In some cases, qualification can be achieved for biomarker research in a specific disease area (Table 2) or on a specific downstream analytical platform. For primary samples, qualification depends on their biomolecular integrity. For simple or complex derivatives, qualification depends both on the biomolecular integrity of the primary sample from which the derivative has been extracted and on the efficiency/performance of the extraction, culture, cryopreservation, or other laboratory manipulation (e.g., cfDNA from plasma; Fig. 1).
2.

QC Measurands for Qualification for Use in Specific Disease Areas

Biospecimen typeMeasurandScope of qualification (disease area)Measurement method
SerumBrain natriuretic peptide (BNP), NT-proBNP[6]Angiopoietin-like 3 (ANFPTL3)Creatinine kinase MB isoenzyme (CK-MB)Endothelin 1 (ET-1)CardiovascularEIAECLIA/EIAEIA
Heparin plasma, serumMatrix metalloproteinase-3 (MMP-3), matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) EIA
All plasma,[a] serumTroponin I & T ECLIA/EIA
All plasmaVasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) EIA
All plasmaCholesterol ester transfer protein activity (CETP)Lipid metabolismFluoroimmunoassay
SerumAlanine aminotransferase (ALT)[7]LiverEnzymatic assay
Serum, all plasmaTumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α)Autoimmune, inflammatorySensitive EIA
SerumInsulin C peptide[8]Insulin-like growth factor II precursorEndocrinology and diabetesFluoroimmunoassay, EIA/RIA
All plasmaGlucagon-like peptide 1 (cleared by DPP4)[9] EIA/RIA
 Adenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH) ECLIA/RIA
All plasma, serumAldosteroneSomatomedin C EIA
Citrate plasmaAnti-factor XaFibrinogenCoagulationClot detection
 Prothrombin fragments 1&2Plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 activity or antigen EIA
 Thrombin generation assay Fluoroimmunoassay
 Tissue-type plasminogen activator antigen (TPA antigen) EIA
UrineBeta 2 microglobulinNephrologyNephelometry, EIA/RIA
All plasma, serumComplement C3Inflammation, immunologyNepholometry, EIA
All plasma, serumIntercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM-1) EIA
Citrate/heparin plasma, serumTNF-α EIA
SerumM65 EpiDeathOncologyEIA
Heparin plasma, serumVascular adhesion molecule I (VCAM-1) EIA
SerumMid-osteocalcin, osteocalcin, calcitoninMusculoskeletalECLIA, EIA
 Parathyroid hormone, intact (PTH) ECLIA, EIA
All plasma, serumTelopeptide C terminal, type 1 collagen ECLIA, EIA
SerumVitamin B12NutritionalECLIA
CSF, serum, all plasmaAmyloid Ab42NeurodegenerativeEIA
Serum, CSFNeuron-specific enolase[10] Kryptor immunoassay, EIA

All plasma refers to all EDTA, citrate, and heparinized plasma.

CSF, cerebrospinal fluid; DPP4, dipeptidylpeptidase 4; ECLIA, electrochemiluminescent immunoassay; EIA, enzyme immunoassay; QC, quality control; RIA, radioimmunoassay.

Flow diagram illustrating sample preparation and qualification for use in research.

Flow diagram illustrating sample preparation and qualification for use in research. QC Measurands for Qualification for Use in Specific Disease Areas All plasma refers to all EDTA, citrate, and heparinized plasma. CSF, cerebrospinal fluid; DPP4, dipeptidylpeptidase 4; ECLIA, electrochemiluminescent immunoassay; EIA, enzyme immunoassay; QC, quality control; RIA, radioimmunoassay.

Results

The results are presented in the form of Tables for fluid (Tables 3 and 4), tissue (Tables 5 and 6), and cytological biospecimens and their derivatives.
3.

QC Measurands for Qualification of Fluid Biospecimens and Their Derivatives

Biospecimen typeQualification parameterMeasurandScope of qualificationMeasurement method
Cf DNAContamination by blood cell DNADNA fragment size 100–300 bp[11]Cf DNA genotypingMicrofluidic electrophoresis
Cf miRNAExtraction efficiencySpike in miRNA control (www.qiagen.com/lu/resources/resourcedetail?id=710c0168-e408-408b-95af-91df5b5b1dd6&lang=en)Cf miRNA analysisqRT PCR
  miRNA 16 or other ubiquitous miRNA targetCf miRNA analysisqRT PCR
Stool DNAInhibitorsSPUD[12]PCR applicationsqPCR
 Extraction efficiencyBacterial DNA contentBacterial DNA analysisqPCR
  Human DNA contentHuman DNA analysisqPCR
Whole-blood cell DNAInhibitorsSPUD[12]PCR applicationsqPCR

Cf, cell free; qRT PCR, quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction.

4.

QC Measurands for Quality Stratification of Fluid Biospecimens and Their Derivatives

Biospecimen typeQuality stratification parameterQuality stratification parameter categoryMeasurandQuality stratification thresholdMeasurement method and reference
SerumPre-centrifugation conditions>8 h 4°CTransferrin receptor>300 IU/mLELISA[13]
 Post-centrifugation conditions>24 h RTsCD40L<4 ng/mLELISA[14]
 Coagulation conditionsNot effectively coagulatedFibrinogen>100 mg/mLELISA
 HemolysisHb contaminatedHb>50 mg/LELISA, spectrophotometry (www.ifcc.org/ifccfiles/docs/130401002end.pdf)
 InflammationInflamedC-reactive protein (CRP)>10 mg/LNephelometry, ELISA
Rapid serum (RST)Pre-centrifugation conditions>48 h 4°CProgastrin-releasing peptide (proGRP)<30 pg/mLArchitect instrument[15]
EDTA plasmaPre-centrifugation conditions<3 h RT<2 h, 2–6 h, >6 h RTLacascoreMetanomics<5MxP score ≥90, 89–70, <70Enzymatic assays[16]GC MS[17]
 Post-centrifugation conditions>24 h RTsCD40L<0.3 ng/mLELISA (Betsou, unpublished)
All plasma[a]Post-centrifugation conditions>4 h RTComplement component 3 peptide (C3f), complement component 4 (C4)C4,1896.1m/zC3f, 2021.1m/zMALDI-TOF-MSLC-ESI-MS/[18,19]
 Platelet contaminationPlatelet poorPlatelets<104/mLCell count (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platelet-poor_plasma)
 Platelet activationActivated plateletsβ-thromboglobulin (βTG)>200 ng/mLELISA[20]
 HemolysisHb contaminatedHb>20 mg/LELISA, spectrophotometry[21] (www.ifcc.org/ejifcc/vol13no4/13041002.htm)
 InflammationInflamedCRP>10 mg/LNephelometry, ELISA
Citrate plasmaPre-centrifugation conditions>26 h 4°CF VIII:C activity<50 IU/dLCoagulation activity assay[22]
 Post-centrifugation conditions>9 years −80°CProtein S activity<50%Coagulation activity assay[23]
UrineFreezing>6 months −20°CAlkaline phosphatase activity<0.1 IU/mmol creatinineEnzymatic assay[24]
 Protein contentLow, intermediate, high, very high protein contentCreatinineCystatin C10, 50, 100 mg/dL10, 50, 100 ng/mLELISA[25]
 acidityAlcalinepH>8pH paper
CSFPost-centrifugation conditions>32 h 4°C>3 months −20°CTransthyretin (TTR) isoformsCystatin C (CycC) truncationUnmodified TTR-Cys10 peak <60%Intact CycC>truncated CysC peakESI-MS[26]MALDI-TOF-MS, SELDI MS[27,28]
 HemolysisHb contaminatedHb>15 ng/mLELISA[28]
StoolInflammationInflamedCalprotectin>50 mg/kgELISA[29]
Whole blood cell DNADouble-strandednessHighly double strandedSpectrofluorimetry>70%Spectrophotometry, spectrofluorimetry
 IntegrityNo degradedMW≥30 kbGel electrophoresis
  With no strand breaksLong-range amplifiability15 kbPCR
 PurityNot protein contaminatedA260/A280 ratio≥1.5Spectrophotometry
 Damage (oxidation, deamination, alkylation)TBDApurinic/apyrimidinc sitesTBDColorimetric detection (aldehyde reactive probe-based)
 Post-bisulfitation qualityOf high DNA integrityPCR amplicon size≥600 bpMultiplex PCR[30]
Whole blood cell RNArRNA integrityOf high integrityRIN>7Microfluidic electrophoresis
 mRNA integrityNot 5′ degradedmRNA index|ΔCt|<1qRT PCR[31]
 purityNot protein contaminatedA260/A280 ratio>1.6Spectrophotometry
 Pre-centrifugation conditions>24 h RTGene targets[b]TBDqRT PCR[32,33]
 WBC subpopulation compositionNormal compositionLymphocytes, granulocyte, monocyte numbersNeutrophils: 2.5–7.5 × 109/LLymphocytes: 1.5–3.5 × 109/LMonocytes: 0.2–0.8 × 109/LBlood count[34] (http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/2085133-overview)

All plasma refers to all EDTA, citrate, and heparinized plasma.

Under investigation by the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER) Biospecimen Science Working Group.

ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; Hb, hemoglobin; LC-ESI-MS, liquid chromatography electrospray ionization mass spectrometry; MALDI-TOF-MS, matrix-assisted laser desporption/ionization time of flight mass spectrometry; RT, room temperature; SELDI MS, surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry; TBD, to be defined; WBC, white blood cell.

5.

QC Measurands for Qualification of Tissue Biospecimens and Their Derivatives

Biospecimen typeQualification parameterMeasurandScope of qualificationMeasurement method
Frozen tissueFreeze–thawCell lysisIHC, RNA-based analysesH&E staining
Viable frozen tissueSterilityAbsence of contaminantsTissue cultureGrowth on agar; mycoplasma testing
 Cryopreservation conditionsPost-thaw viability Growth in flasks

H&E, hematoxylin and eosin.

6.

QC Measurands for Quality Stratification of Tissue Biospecimens and Their Derivatives

Biospecimen typeQuality stratification parameterQuality stratification parameter categoryMeasurandQuality stratification thresholdMeasurement method and reference
Tumor% tumorTumor-richTumor>70%H&E staining, digital pathology
FFPEFixation time NBF>72 hNone to date[a]TBDqRT PCR
 Fixation conditionsNBF (no acidic formalin)Size range RT PCR∼250 bpRT PCR
 Cold ischemia>12 hNone to date[a]TBDqRT PCR
Frozen tissueCold ischemia>12 hNone to date[a]TBDqRT PCR
FFPE DNAFixation conditions (cross-linking); extraction efficiencyDNA integrityHighly deaminatedqPCR ΔCtΔCt ≥1.55Illumina FFPE QC kitAgilent NGS FFPE QC kitor equivalent[42]
  CGH compatibleWGA compatiblePCR amplicon size≥200bp,≥300 bpMultiplex PCR[43,44]
  Of good integrityWGA score≥3 μg yieldWGA (www.enzolifesciences.com/ENZ-42440/bioscore-screening-and-amplification-kit-20-reactions)
  Of good integrityDIN>7Microfluidic electrophoresis
FFPE RNAmRNA integrityExtremely 5′ degradedmRNA index|ΔCt|>8qRT PCR[31]
  Of good mRNA integritySize range RT PCR∼250 bpRT PCR
 Fixation time>72 hGene targets[a]TBDqRT PCR
 Ischemia time>12 hGene targets[a]TBDqRT PCR
FFPE proteinsIschemia timeTBDPhospho-Tyrosine (P Tyr 100)TBDIHC[45]
Frozen tissue DNAProcessing/storage conditions; extraction efficiencyWith no strand breaksLong range PCR15 kbPCR
Frozen tissue RNAProcessing/storage conditions; extraction efficiencyrRNA integrityOf high integrityRINRISDV200or equivalent>6Microfluidic electrophoresis(www.agilent.com/cs/library/applications/5989-1165EN.pdf), (www.qiagen.com/gb/shop/automated-solutions/dna-analysis/qiaxcel-advanced-system/), (www.aati-us.com/product/fragment-analyzer/download_dv200_metric)
 mRNA integrityNot 5′ degradedmRNA index|ΔCt|<1qRT PCR[31]
 PurityNot protein contaminatedA260/A280 ratio>1.6Spectrophotometry
Frozen tissue proteinsPostmortem interval/ischemia>48 h cold ischemiaαII spectrin cleavage (no 285 kDa, only 150 kDa)285 kDa >150 kDaWestern blot[46]

Under investigation by the ISBER Biospecimen Science Working Group.

FFPE, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded; NBF, normal buffered formalin.

QC Measurands for Qualification of Fluid Biospecimens and Their Derivatives Cf, cell free; qRT PCR, quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. QC Measurands for Quality Stratification of Fluid Biospecimens and Their Derivatives All plasma refers to all EDTA, citrate, and heparinized plasma. Under investigation by the International Society for Biological and Environmental Repositories (ISBER) Biospecimen Science Working Group. ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; Hb, hemoglobin; LC-ESI-MS, liquid chromatography electrospray ionization mass spectrometry; MALDI-TOF-MS, matrix-assisted laser desporption/ionization time of flight mass spectrometry; RT, room temperature; SELDI MS, surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry; TBD, to be defined; WBC, white blood cell. QC Measurands for Qualification of Tissue Biospecimens and Their Derivatives H&E, hematoxylin and eosin. QC Measurands for Quality Stratification of Tissue Biospecimens and Their Derivatives Under investigation by the ISBER Biospecimen Science Working Group. FFPE, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded; NBF, normal buffered formalin. Table 2 includes information on QC measurands for qualification for use of samples in specific disease areas.[4,5] The measurands in this table are molecules that are recognized biomarkers in the respective disease areas and are also known to be labile. Detection of the measurand above the method's level of detection is necessary (though not always sufficient) for qualification of a sample. As an example for reading Table 2, if Aβ42 is undetectable in CSF samples, then these samples cannot be qualified for research in the area of neurodegenerative diseases. Tables 3, 5, and 7 include information that can be used for the qualification of fluid, tissue, or cytological specimens, respectively, in the scope of different types of downstream analyses. In these tables, “qualification parameter” is the quality aspect of the biospecimen that is being evaluated; “measurand” is the molecule, or the morphological or functional characteristic that is being measured and whose positive or negative result is necessary for the qualification; “scope of qualification” is the type of downstream analysis for which the biospecimen is being qualified as fit-for-purpose; and “measurement method” is the type of method that is used to measure the measurand.
7.

QC Measurands for Qualification of Cytological Biospecimens

Biospecimen typeQualification parameterMeasurandScope of qualificationMeasurement method
All cell suspensionsSterilityAbsence of contaminantsCultureGrowth on agar; mycoplasma testing
 IdentityProtein markersGenetic identityAny type of downstream analysisICC, ELISA, FCPCR, STR genotyping, FISH, karyology
 PurityAbsence of protein markersAbsence of cellular impuritiesAny type of downstream analysisICC, ELISA, FCFC
 Genomic stabilityChromosomal stabilityPhenotypic stabilityAny type of downstream analysisG-banding, ICC, FC, microscopy
Cell lineIdentitySTR, karyotype, SNP fingerprint[47]Any type of downstream analysisPCR, karyology/FISH, sequencing/arrays
Stem cellsSterilityAbsence of contaminantsCulture, functional assaysGrowth on agar; mycoplasma testing, HIV, HBV, HCV, EBV, CMV, syphilis, fungus, bacteria, endotoxin
 Normal karyotypeKaryotypeAny type of downstream analysisG-banding
 Identity matchingMatch parent cellsAny type of downstream analysisSTR
 Non oncogenicityC-Myc, P53, p21, p16 absence of expressionAny type of downstream analysisImmunostaining, gene expression
Lymphoblastoid cell lines (LCL)Normal karyotypeKaryotypeAny type of downstream analysisG-banding
 EBV transformationEBV gene expressionAny type of downstream analysisRT PCR[48]
Circulating tumor cells (CTC)Cancer phenotypeEpCam+, CK8+, 18+, 19+, CD45–Any type of downstream analysisImmunostaining[49]

CMV, cytomegalovirus; FC, flow cytometry; FISH, fluorescent in situ hybridization; HBV, hepatitis B virus; HCV, hepatitis C virus; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; ICC, immunocytochemistry; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism; STR, short tandem repeats.

QC Measurands for Qualification of Cytological Biospecimens CMV, cytomegalovirus; FC, flow cytometry; FISH, fluorescent in situ hybridization; HBV, hepatitis B virus; HCV, hepatitis C virus; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; ICC, immunocytochemistry; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism; STR, short tandem repeats. Tables 4, 6, and 8 include information that can be used for the quality stratification of a fluid, tissue, or cytological biospecimen, respectively. In these tables, “qualification parameter” is the quality aspect of the biospecimen for which the biospecimen is being stratified; “measurand” is the molecule, or the morphological or functional characteristic that is being measured and whose level is used to stratify the biospecimens in categories; “quality stratification thresholds” are the levels of the measurand, which are critical for the quality stratification; and “measurement method” is the type of method that is used to measure the measurand. The quality stratification thresholds listed in Tables 4, 6, and 8 classify the biospecimens into the categories of the qualification parameter given. The “time xxx/temperature yyy” categories correspond to available experimental data, but they should be understood as “time xxx/temperature yyy or equivalent conditions.” The quality stratification thresholds listed in Tables 4, 6, and 8 are those corresponding to the measurement methods described in the references. Application of a threshold with a measurement method that is different from the method that has been used for the establishment of the threshold requires previous demonstration of the commutability of the methods.
8.

QC Measurands for Quality Stratification of Cytological Biospecimens

Biospecimen typeQuality stratification parameterQuality stratification parameter categoryMeasurandQuality stratification thresholdMeasurement method and reference
Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs)CryopreservationOf high viabilityPost thaw viability>80%FC; trypan blue
 Specificity (granulocyte contamination)<12–14 h RT post venipuncture;With no T-cell function inhibitionCD15+ granulocytes<20%FC[50]
All cell suspensionsBiological activityCell type specificReceptorsSecreted proteinsmRNA expressionMigrationCell type-specificICC, FC, microscopy, FRET microscopy, ELISA, qRT PCR, microarrayDunn, Boyden or Impedance Chamber, Scratch assay, Matrigel invasion assay
 Concentration, viabilityOf high viabilityCell numberViability>80%FC, impedance, microscopyViability assays
SpermDNA integrityOf compromised DNA integrityAcridine Orange staining and acid-induced denaturationCOMPat[a] >30%Sperm chromatin structure assay[51]
Viable RBCStorage lesion>4 days 4°C2,3-diphosphoglycerate (2,3-DPG)<2 mmol/LSpectrophotometry (340 nm)[52]
Viable plateletsActivationWith highly activated plateletsSurface P selectin (CD62)>70%Flow cytometry[53]
Stem cellsCryopreservation conditionsEfficiently cryopreservedColony formation and diameter doubling<5 daysColony doubling
 Surface antigen expression of stem cell markersStem cell positiveexpression SSEA-4, expression SSEA-1>80%, <20%Immunostaining
 PluripotencyPluripotentUpregulation of genes associated with each of the three germ layers2-fold compared to control (at least one gene per germ layer)qRT PCR
Liquid biopsy-based cytology specimensCell concentrationDownstream application-specificNumber of cellsDownstream application-specificCell count
Sorted cellsPurityPure% of cells with expected immunophenotype, e.g., T cells (CD3), NK cells (CD16/56), B cells (CD19/20), monocytes (CD14), functional memory B cells (CD19, CD27, CD45, CD38, CD138)>90%Flow cytometry

COMP, cells outside the main population.

FRET, fluorescence resonance energy transfer; RBC, red blood cell; SSEA, stage-specific embryonic antigen.

QC Measurands for Quality Stratification of Cytological Biospecimens COMP, cells outside the main population. FRET, fluorescence resonance energy transfer; RBC, red blood cell; SSEA, stage-specific embryonic antigen.

Tissue type specificities

Assays for tissue qualification or quality stratification may be tissue type–specific. Some examples are given below. Fixation conditions have a significant impact on P-Akt and P-Erk1/2 in breast cancer tissue.[35] Ischemia has a significant impact on estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast tissue.[36,37] A Tissue Quality Index has been proposed for formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded breast tissue in order to assess its cold ischemia time by immunohistochemistry.[38] Stathmin[2-20] has been proposed as indicator of degradation in brain tissue by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time of flight mass spectrometry.[39] AKT-P has been proposed as indicator of postmortem conditions in brain tissue by western blot.[40] Superoxide dismutase in the liver and peptidyl-prolyl-cis-trans isomerase and insulin C-peptides in the pancreas have been associated with postmortem delay and assessed by two-dimensional difference in gel electrophoresis.[41]

Discussion

This article proposes a biospecimen QC strategy, based on current state of knowledge, in the form of summary tables (Fig. 2).

Decision tree for any given specimen type.

Decision tree for any given specimen type. The qualification and quality stratification assays presented in this technical report do not aim for an absolute assessment of the quality of samples, since a sample can be of high enough quality (fit-for-purpose) for one type of analysis (e.g., antibody analysis), but not for other types of analyses (e.g., metabolite analysis). Therefore, scientists should devote time and effort to understand and define what sample quality is needed to obtain consistent results with a given downstream analytical platform. As can be seen from Tables 3, 5, and 7, there are several gaps in the area of biospecimen qualification for use on specific analytical platforms. These include, for example, urine, saliva, or frozen tissue qualification for use in proteomic analyses, serum, plasma, or other body fluid qualification for use in miRNome analyses, or DNA qualification for use in methylation analyses. In the absence of such knowledge, this technical report offers a strategy for sample quality stratification so that bias due to samples of inconsistent quality levels can be minimized. The information provided in this report is important because its application will enable and support bioprocessing method validation by providing relevant readouts (measurands); assessment of the quality of biospecimens of unknown history; biomarker discovery by ensuring use of qualified biospecimens or biospecimens belonging to a specific quality category; validation of biomarker robustness by using quality-stratified biospecimens belonging to different, defined quality categories; implementation of novel biomarkers in clinical practice; and characterization and production of clinical reference materials. For the above purposes, QC measurands of clinical biospecimens can be assessed either by the biobanks themselves, or by subcontractors/collaborators who are accredited or successfully participate in relevant Proficiency Testing schemes. The results of the QC can be used by biobanks for qualification of legacy collections (the definition of cutoff values for acceptance of legacy collections or specific samples can be made and disclosed by the biobank), by end users for stratification of samples of different origins, or by funding agencies for assessment of the fitness for purpose of collections to be used in the context of grant allocation.
  48 in total

1.  The effects of anticoagulation and processing on assays of IL-6, sIL-6R, sIL-2R and soluble transferrin receptor.

Authors:  R De Jongh; J Vranken; G Vundelinckx; E Bosmans; M Maes; R Heylen
Journal:  Cytokine       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 3.861

2.  Long-term stability of coagulation variables: Protein S as a biomarker for preanalytical storage-related variations in human plasma.

Authors:  Fotini Betsou; Bertrand Roussel; Nicolas Guillaume; Jean-Jacques Lefrère
Journal:  Thromb Haemost       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 5.249

3.  Stability of selected serum proteins after long-term storage in the Janus Serum Bank.

Authors:  Randi E Gislefoss; Tom K Grimsrud; Lars Mørkrid
Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.694

4.  Multicenter evaluation of a new progastrin-releasing peptide (ProGRP) immunoassay across Europe and China.

Authors:  Catharina M Korse; Stefan Holdenrieder; Xiu-yi Zhi; Xiaotong Zhang; Ling Qiu; Andrea Geistanger; Marcus-Rene Lisy; Birgit Wehnl; Daan van den Broek; José M Escudero; Jens Standop; Mu Hu; Rafael Molina
Journal:  Clin Chim Acta       Date:  2014-09-28       Impact factor: 3.786

5.  Standard preanalytical coding for biospecimens: review and implementation of the Sample PREanalytical Code (SPREC).

Authors:  Sabine Lehmann; Fiorella Guadagni; Helen Moore; Garry Ashton; Michael Barnes; Erica Benson; Judith Clements; Iren Koppandi; Domenico Coppola; Sara Yasemin Demiroglu; Yvonne DeSouza; Annemieke De Wilde; Jacko Duker; James Eliason; Barbara Glazer; Keith Harding; Jae Pil Jeon; Joseph Kessler; Theresa Kokkat; Umberto Nanni; Kathi Shea; Amy Skubitz; Stella Somiari; Gunnel Tybring; Elaine Gunter; Fotini Betsou
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.300

6.  Phosphotyrosine signaling analysis in human tumors is confounded by systemic ischemia-driven artifacts and intra-specimen heterogeneity.

Authors:  Aaron S Gajadhar; Hannah Johnson; Robbert J C Slebos; Kent Shaddox; Kerry Wiles; Mary Kay Washington; Alan J Herline; Douglas A Levine; Daniel C Liebler; Forest M White
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 12.701

7.  Stability of serum alanine aminotransferase activity.

Authors:  K M Williams; A E Williams; L M Kline; R Y Dodd
Journal:  Transfusion       Date:  1987 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.157

8.  Quality markers addressing preanalytical variations of blood and plasma processing identified by broad and targeted metabolite profiling.

Authors:  Beate Kamlage; Sandra González Maldonado; Bianca Bethan; Erik Peter; Oliver Schmitz; Volker Liebenberg; Philipp Schatz
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 8.327

9.  Extreme loss of immunoreactive p-Akt and p-Erk1/2 during routine fixation of primary breast cancer.

Authors:  Isabel F Pinhel; Fiona A Macneill; Margaret J Hills; Janine Salter; Simone Detre; Roger A'hern; Ashutosh Nerurkar; Peter Osin; Ian E Smith; Mitch Dowsett
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 6.466

10.  A multiplex PCR predictor for aCGH success of FFPE samples.

Authors:  E H van Beers; S A Joosse; M J Ligtenberg; R Fles; F B L Hogervorst; S Verhoef; P M Nederlof
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2006-01-30       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  15 in total

Review 1.  Understanding preanalytical variables and their effects on clinical biomarkers of oncology and immunotherapy.

Authors:  Lokesh Agrawal; Kelly B Engel; Sarah R Greytak; Helen M Moore
Journal:  Semin Cancer Biol       Date:  2017-12-16       Impact factor: 15.707

2.  How Should Biobanks Prioritize and Diversify Biosample Collections? A 40-Year Scientific Publication Trend Analysis by the Type of Biosample.

Authors:  Jae-Eun Lee; Young-Youl Kim
Journal:  OMICS       Date:  2018-03-27

Review 3.  Role of Biobanks for Cancer Research and Precision Medicine in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Peyda Korhan; Sanem Tercan Avcı; Yeliz Yılmaz; Yasemin Öztemur Islakoğlu; Neşe Atabey
Journal:  J Gastrointest Cancer       Date:  2021-11-22

4.  Impact of Specimen Heterogeneity on Biomarkers in Repository Samples from Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A SWOG Report.

Authors:  Era L Pogosova-Agadjanyan; Anna Moseley; Megan Othus; Frederick R Appelbaum; Thomas R Chauncey; I-Ming L Chen; Harry P Erba; John E Godwin; Min Fang; Kenneth J Kopecky; Alan F List; Galina L Pogosov; Jerald P Radich; Cheryl L Willman; Brent L Wood; Soheil Meshinchi; Derek L Stirewalt
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 2.256

5.  Biobanks and scientists: supply and demand.

Authors:  Angelo Virgilio Paradiso; Maria Grazia Daidone; Vincenzo Canzonieri; Alfredo Zito
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2018-05-22       Impact factor: 5.531

6.  Biobanks in the Era of Digital Medicine.

Authors:  Gunnar Jacobs; Andreas Wolf; Michael Krawczak; Wolfgang Lieb
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2017-12-29       Impact factor: 6.875

Review 7.  Biobanking in health care: evolution and future directions.

Authors:  Luigi Coppola; Alessandra Cianflone; Anna Maria Grimaldi; Mariarosaria Incoronato; Paolo Bevilacqua; Francesco Messina; Simona Baselice; Andrea Soricelli; Peppino Mirabelli; Marco Salvatore
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2019-05-22       Impact factor: 5.531

8.  The biobank of barretos cancer hospital: 14 years of experience in cancer research.

Authors:  Ana Caroline Neuber; Cássio Hoft Tostes; Adeylson Guimarães Ribeiro; Gabriella Taques Marczynski; Tatiana Takahasi Komoto; Caroline Domingues Rogeri; Vinicius Duval da Silva; Edmundo Carvalho Mauad; Rui Manuel Reis; Márcia M C Marques
Journal:  Cell Tissue Bank       Date:  2021-07-03       Impact factor: 1.522

9.  How Should Biobanks Collect Biosamples for Clinical Application? A 20-year Biomarker-related Publication and Patent Trend Analysis.

Authors:  Jae-Eun Lee
Journal:  Osong Public Health Res Perspect       Date:  2018-06

10.  Acceptable Weight Ranges for Research Tissue Procurement and Biorepositories, 2015-2017.

Authors:  David G Nohle; Randal L Mandt; Marta E Couce; Anil V Parwani; Leona W Ayers
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 2.300

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.