Detection of the Circulating Tumor Cells in Cancer Patients

Armakolas, Athanasios; Panteleakou, Zacharoula; Nezos, Adrianos; Tsouma, Aikaterini; Skondra, Maria; Lembessis, Peter; Pissimissis, Nikolaos; Koutsilieris, Michael

doi:10.2217/fon.10.152

Cited by 28 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…16 Furthermore, some markers used by CellSearch like CK19, EGF receptor, and mammaglobin have been shown to be expressed in normal mitogen-stimulated peripheral blood mononuclear cells. 17 An alternative paradigm for CTC detection is through leveraging differences in physical characteristics of tumor cells, such as size, charge, density, and biomarker expression which can ultimately lead to target-cell isolation. For instance, the herringbone-chip developed by Mehemt Toner et al 18 utilizes antibody-biomarker binding to capture CTCs from the blood.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Separation of tumor cells with dielectrophoresis-based microfluidic chip

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present work demonstrates the use of a dielectrophoretic lab-on-a-chip device in effectively separating different cancer cells of epithelial origin for application in circulating tumor cell (CTC) identification. This study uses dielectrophoresis (DEP) to distinguish and separate MCF-7 human breast cancer cells from HCT-116 colorectal cancer cells. The DEP responses for each cell type were measured against AC electrical frequency changes in solutions of varying conductivities. Increasing the conductivity of the suspension directly correlated with an increasing frequency value for the first cross-over (no DEP force) point in the DEP spectra. Differences in the cross-over frequency for each cell type were leveraged to determine a frequency at which the two types of cell could be separated through DEP forces. Under a particular medium conductivity, different types of cells could have different DEP behaviors in a very narrow AC frequency band, demonstrating a high specificity of DEP. Using a microfluidic DEP sorter with optically transparent electrodes, MCF-7 and HCT-116 cells were successfully separated from each other under a 3.2 MHz frequency in a 0.1X PBS solution. Further experiments were conducted to characterize the separation efficiency (enrichment factor) by changing experimental parameters (AC frequency, voltage, and flow rate). This work has shown the high specificity of the described DEP cell sorter for distinguishing cells with similar characteristics for potential diagnostic applications through CTC enrichment. V C 2013 American Institute of Physics. [http://dx

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Separation of tumor cells with dielectrophoresis-based microfluidic chip

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Early cancer detection is crucial for improved prognosis and cancer management due to the small tumor size and localization of the tumor at the primary site [3] [4]. Conventional cancer cell sorting techniques, which have been reviewed elsewhere [5] [6] including centrifugation, chromatography, and fluorescence and magnetic-activated cell sorting, are limited in yield and purity and further rely on the expertise and subjective judgments of highly skilled personnel. The small sample volumes, fast processing times, multiplexing capabilities, and large surface to volume ratios inherent in microfluidic systems [7] [8] offer new opportunities for cytology and cyto-pathology [9]- [18] particularly for in vitro cell sorting and detection [17] [19]- [25].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microfluidic Approaches for Cancer Cell Separation: Review

Saeed¹,

Li²,

Deng³

2014

JBiSE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet the detection and characterization of CTCs remains a significant challenge due to the rarity of CTCs (~10–100 per mL of blood). The most commonly used method for identifying CTCs, CellSearch, is based on the enumeration of epithelial cells using anti-epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) antibodies and subsequent staining for visualization [7]. CellSearch’s low sensitivity to low EpCAM expression cancers and EpCAM-negative cancers, which account for 40% and 20% of cancers, respectively, has created a need for new methods to detect CTCs with greater sensitivity.…”

Section: Circulating Tumor Cells In Ovarian Cancer-derived Bloodmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring alternative ovarian cancer biomarkers using innovative nanotechnology strategies

Castro

et al. 2014

Cancer Metastasis Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our increased understanding of ovarian cancer's blueprints (mediated by DNA and RNA) and behavior (mediated by proteins) points to wide differences across patients that cannot be depicted by histology alone. Conventional diagnosis usually entails an adequate tissue biopsy, which limits serial testing. There is thus a motivation to shift towards easier to obtain clinical samples (e.g. ascites or blood). In response, investigators are increasingly leveraging alternative circulating biomarkers in blood or proximal fluids and harnessing novel profiling platforms to help explore treatment related effects on such biomarkers in serial fashion. In this review, we discuss how new nanotechnologies we developed intersect with alternative ovarian cancer biomarkers for improved understanding of metastases and therapeutic response.

show abstract

Detection of the Circulating Tumor Cells in Cancer Patients

Cited by 28 publications

References 59 publications

Separation of tumor cells with dielectrophoresis-based microfluidic chip

Separation of tumor cells with dielectrophoresis-based microfluidic chip

Microfluidic Approaches for Cancer Cell Separation: Review

Exploring alternative ovarian cancer biomarkers using innovative nanotechnology strategies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About