Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Small Biopsies (small + biopsy)
Selected AbstractsTHE MOLECULAR FUTURE IN CYTOLOGYCYTOPATHOLOGY, Issue 2006M. Salto-Tellez Molecular diagnosis is the application of molecular biology techniques and knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of disease to diagnosis, prognostication and treatment of diseases. Molecular Diagnosis is, arguably, the fastest growing area of diagnostic medicine. The US market for molecular testing generated $1.3 billion in 2000, which was predicted to increase to about $4.2 billion by 2007.1 We proposed the term Diagnostic Molecular Cytopathology to define the application of molecular diagnosis to cytopathology2. Diagnostic Molecular Cytopathology is essential for the following reasons: (i) Molecular testing is sometimes indispensable to establish an unequivocal diagnosis on cell preparations; (ii) Molecular testing provides extra information on the prognosis or therapy of diseases diagnosed by conventional cytology; (iii) Molecular testing provides genetic information on the inherited nature of diseases that can be directly investigated in cytology samples, by either exfoliation or by fine needle aspiration; (iv) Sometimes the cytopathology sample is the most convenient (or the only available) source of material for molecular testing; (v). Direct molecular interrogation of cells allows for a diagnostic correlation that would otherwise not be possible. Parallel to this direct diagnostic implication, cytopathology is increasing important in the validation of biomarkers for specific diseases, and in therefore of significant importance in the overall translational research strategies. We illustrate its application in some of the main areas of oncology molecular testing, such as molecular fingerprinting of neoplasms,3 lymphoreticular diseases,2 sarcomas4 and lung cancer,5 as well as translational research using diagnostic cytopathology techniques. The next years will see the consolidation of Diagnostic Molecular Cytopathology, a process that will lead to a change of many paradigms. In general, diagnostic pathology departments will have to reorganize molecular testing to pursue a cost-efficient operation. Sample preparation will have to take into account optimal preservation of nuclear acids. The training of technical staff and the level of laboratory quality control and quality assurance would have to follow strict clinical (not research) laboratory parameters. And, most importantly, those pathologists undertaking molecular diagnosis as a discipline would have to develop their professional expertise within the same framework of fellowships and professional credentials that is offered in other sub-specialties. The price to pay if this effort is not undertaken is too important for the future of diagnostic pathology in general. The increasing characterization of molecular biomarkers with diagnostic, prognostic or therapeutic value is making the analysis of tissue and cell samples prior to treatment a more complex exercise. If cytopathologists and histopathologists allow others to take charge of molecular diagnosis, our overall contribution to the diagnostic process will be diminished. We may not become less important, but we may become less relevant. However, those within the discipline of diagnostic pathology who can combine the clinical background of diseases with the morphological, immunocytochemical and molecular diagnostic interpretation will represent bona fide diagnostic specialists. Such ,molecular cytopathologists' would place themselves at the centre of clinical decision-making. Reference:, 1. Liz Fletcher. Roche leads molecular diagnostics charge. Nature Biotechnol 20, 6,7; 2002 2. Salto-Tellez M and Koay ESC. Molecular Diagnostic Cytopathology - Definitions, Scope and Clinical Utility. Cytopathology 2004; 15:252,255 3. Salto-Tellez M, Zhang D, Chiu LL, Wang SC, Nilsson B, and Koay ESC. Immunocytochemistry Versus Molecular Fingerprinting of Metastases. Cytopathology, 2003 Aug; 14(4):186,90. 4. Chiu LL, Koay SCE, Chan NL and Salto-Tellez M. Molecular Cytopathology: Sequencing of the EWS-WT1 Gene Fusion Transcript in the Peritoneal Effusion of a Patient with Desmoplastic Small Round Cell Tumour. Diagnostic Cytopathology, 2003 Dec; 29(6): 341,3. 5. TM Chin, D Anuar, R Soo, M Salto-Tellez, WQ Li, B Ahmad, SC Lee, BC Goh, K Kawakami, A Segal, B Iacopetta, R Soong. Sensitive and Cost-Effective deptection of epidermal growth factor Receptor Mutations in Small Biopsies by denaturing High Performance Liquid Chromatography. (In press). [source] Androgen Receptor Expression Helps to Differentiate BCC From Trichoblastoma and TrichoepitheliomaJOURNAL OF CUTANEOUS PATHOLOGY, Issue 1 2005L. Izikson Histological differentiation between basal cell carcinoma and benign trichoblastic neoplasms such as trichoepithelioma and trichoblastoma can be difficult on small biopsies. Therefore, several attempts have been made to identify immunohistochemical differences between these entities. Recent studies showed androgen receptor expression in a number of mature epithelial structures in the skin and in epithelial neoplasms including basal cell carcinoma. In contrast, androgen receptor expression was absent in mature hair follicles or the few trichogenic neoplasms studied to date. These findings suggested that androgen receptor expression might be a useful adjunct in the histological differential diagnosis between basal cell carcinoma and benign trichoblastic neoplasms. Therefore, we performed immunohistochemical analysis of androgen receptor expression in 32 basal cell carcinomas and 10 benign trichoblastic tumors (6 trichoepitheliomas and 4 trichoblastomas). In our study, expression of androgen receptor was detected in 78% of basal cell carcinomas. None of the trichoblastic tumors showed any androgen receptor immunoreactivity. These results confirm the lack of androgen receptor expression in benign trichoblastic neoplasms and indicate that finding of androgen receptor expression points to basal cell carcinoma as the most likely diagnosis. [source] Comparison of formalin and FineFIX in preserving DNA material in small biopsiesPATHOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, Issue 10 2008Fatemeh Mahjoub No abstract is available for this article. [source] Generation of a scaffold free cartilage-like implant from a small amount of starting materialJOURNAL OF CELLULAR AND MOLECULAR MEDICINE, Issue 2 2006M. J. Stoddart Abstract Introduction: An autologous cellular based treatment of a traumatic cartilage injury requires a procedure whereby a biopsy of healthy cartilage is removed from the patient and the cells isolated and expanded by monolayer passage. This increases the cell number to required levels but also leads to a de-differentiation of the cells. We aim to produce a scaffold-free, de-novo implant from a biopsy of cartilage. Methods: Bovine chondrocytes were isolated from a small biopsy and expanded. The chondrocytic phenotype of the monolayer expanded cells was recovered during a period of culture in alginate and the effect of factors such as IGF1, TFG,1 and dexamethasone was investigated. Results: During the alginate culture period a pre-treatment with IGF1 and dexamethasone was shown to have little effect. IGF1 however increased the glycosaminoglycan/DNA (GAG/DNA) content on day 14 to 84.95±5ng/ng compared with 37.3±1.8ng/ng in the controls (P <0.001). 35S labeling demonstrated an increased GAG synthesis in the presence of IGF1 (P < 0.001). IGF1 also induced a increase of DNA content 1383±314ng/bead compared to 512±19ng/bead in the controls (P < 0.001). The cells were released from the alginate and cultured in a silicon mould for a further 14 days to obtain a three dimensional implant. Releasing the cells from the alginate and casting in a mould produced an implant of defined shape which contained no foreign material. After 31 days of culture the implants contained 152.4±13.14ng/ng GAG/DNA and 42.93±10.23ng/ng collagen II. Discussion: We believe alginate released chondrocytes provide a real alternative to artificial scaffolds. [source] | ||||||||||