| Literature DB >> 31799154 |
Pushkal Sinduvadi Ramesh1, Venkatesh Madegowda1, Suprith Kumar1, Shailashree Narasimha1, Parichay S R2, Nandini Nandish Manoli3, Devananda Devegowda4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Histopathologically stained archived tissue slides are stored in hospital archives for years to decades. They are the largest available source of biological materials and are a potentially useful resource that can be used for retrospective epidemiological studies. DNA recovered from the slides can be used for several downstream molecular processes including polymerase chain reaction, single nucleotide polymorphism analysis, and whole genome sequencing. The DNA from these slides can be utilized to compare gene signatures of normal and diseased tissues. However, extraction of high-quality DNA from archived stained hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) slides remains challenging. AIM: To standardize a new protocol for extracting DNA from archived H&E-stained tissue slides for further molecular assays.Entities:
Keywords: DNA extraction; Deparaffinization; Hematoxylin and eosin tissue slides; Molecular analysis; Polymerase chain reaction
Year: 2019 PMID: 31799154 PMCID: PMC6885493 DOI: 10.5662/wjm.v9.i3.32
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Methodol ISSN: 2222-0682
Figure 1Workflow for extraction of DNA from archived H&E-stained cancer tissue slides. A: Slides selected for the extraction of DNA; B: Coverslip removal and scraping of the tissues; C: Xylene treatment for deparaffinization; D: Ethanol rehydration and stain removal; E: Tissue digestion; F: Nucleic acid purification by phase separation followed by DNA precipitation; G: Quantification of DNA using Nanodrop; H: Assessment of quality of the extracted DNA.
Figure 2Representative image of DNA extracted from H&E-stained slides on a 1% agarose gel stained with ethidium bromide. The DNA extracted from archived H&E-stained slides were assessed for its quality by agarose gel electrophoresis. Only intact DNA as seen in the figure was considered fit for further analysis. H&E: Hematoxylin and eosin.
Yield and purity of the recovered DNA from various methods
| 1 | 20 | Xylene | 24 h | No | 7.65-45.23 | 1.42-2.01 |
| 2 | 20 | Xylene | 24 h | Yes | 7.53-33.7 | 1.34-1.94 |
| 3 | 20 | Xylene | 72 h | No | 23.68-208.31 | 1.68-1.89 |
| 4 | 20 | Xylene | 72 h | Yes | 13-149.41 | 1.54-1.93 |
| 5 | 20 | Mineral oil | 72 h | No | 11.74-86.74 | 1.41-1.74 |
Figure 3Graph showing DNA yield (ng/µL) from different DNA extraction methods. Data represented as mean ± standard error of the mean. It is clearly visible from the graph that method 3 wherein xylene was used for deparaffinization with 72 h of lysis duration showed the maximum yield of DNA. Similarly, method 4 with proteinase K inactivation also showed better DNA yield.
Statistical comparison of the DNA yield among various methods
| 1 | Method 1 | 0.908 | 0.0003 | NS |
| 2 | Method 1 | < 0.0001 | 0.401 | c |
| 3 | Method 1 | 0.0017 | 0.23 | b |
| 4 | Method 1 | 0.524 | 0.01 | NS |
| 5 | Method 2 | < 0.0001 | 0.418 | c |
| 6 | Method 2 | 0.0011 | 0.248 | b |
| 7 | Method 2 | 0.393 | 0.019 | NS |
| 8 | Method 3 | 0.13 | 0.059 | NS |
| 9 | Method 3 | < 0.0001 | 0.366 | c |
| 10 | Method 4 | 0.004 | 0.192 | b |
P value < 0.05 was considered significant; bP < 0.01, cP < 0.001. NS: Not significant.
Figure 4Representative image of 2% agarose gel showing amplified 238 bp product of the housekeeping GAPDH gene. Samples 1-5, 8-10, and 13-14 showed clear amplification bands, while samples 6-7 and 11-12 showed mild amplification. In contrast, samples 15-17 showed no amplification at all. L: 100 bp DNA ladder; PC: Positive control; NC: Negative control.