Microfluidic channel‐assisted screening of hematopoietic malignancies

Mughal, Farah; Baldock, Sara J.; Karimiani, Ehsan Ghayoor; Telford, Nick; Goddard, N J; Day, Philip J.

doi:10.1002/gcc.22137

Cited by 17 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mughal et al also employed a straight microchannel design for their FISH on-chip assay, however, with significantly smaller channel dimensions which they termed FISHing lines [41]. The 1-cm-long microfluidic channels, flanked by inlet and outlet wells of 1-mm diameter, were etched into glass microscope slides to a depth of 50 µm with a width of about 45 µm at the top and 30 µm at the bottom of the channel.…”

Section: Cells Immobilized In Single Straight Channelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reproduced with permission from Ref. [41]. d Narrow inlet and outlet channels around deep chamber for cell trapping fabricated in COC.…”

Section: Trapping Cells On Membranes or In Regular Arraysmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reproduced with permission from Ref. [77] investigation varied, some using only 50-100 cells [41,52,58] or on the order of 1000 cells [57,75], others at tens of thousands [56,59].…”

Section: Comparison Of Microfluidic Fish Platformsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

FISH and chips: a review of microfluidic platforms for FISH analysis

Rodriguez-Mateos

Azevedo

Almeida

et al. 2020

Med Microbiol Immunol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) allows visualization of specific nucleic acid sequences within an intact cell or a tissue section. It is based on molecular recognition between a fluorescently labeled probe that penetrates the cell membrane of a fixed but intact sample and hybridizes to a nucleic acid sequence of interest within the cell, rendering a measurable signal. FISH has been applied to, for example, gene mapping, diagnosis of chromosomal aberrations and identification of pathogens in complex samples as well as detailed studies of cellular structure and function. However, FISH protocols are complex, they comprise of many fixation, incubation and washing steps involving a range of solvents and temperatures and are, thus, generally time consuming and labor intensive. The complexity of the process, the relatively high-priced fluorescent probes and the fairly high-end microscopy needed for readout render the whole process costly and have limited wider uptake of this powerful technique. In recent years, there have been attempts to transfer FISH assay protocols onto microfluidic lab-on-a-chip platforms, which reduces the required amount of sample and reagents, shortens incubation times and, thus, time to complete the protocol, and finally has the potential for automating the process. Here, we review the wide variety of approaches for lab-on-chip-based FISH that have been demonstrated at proof-of-concept stage, ranging from FISH analysis of immobilized cell layers, and cells trapped in arrays, to FISH on tissue slices. Some researchers have aimed to develop simple devices that interface with existing equipment and workflows, whilst others have aimed to integrate the entire FISH protocol into a fully autonomous FISH on-chip system. Whilst the technical possibilities for FISH on-chip are clearly demonstrated, only a small number of approaches have so far been converted into off-the-shelf products for wider use beyond the research laboratory. Keywords Microfluidics-assisted FISH • µFISH • Microfluidics • Lab-on-a-Chip (LOC) • Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) Edited by Volkhard A. J. Kempf.

show abstract

Section: Cells Immobilized In Single Straight Channelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reproduced with permission from Ref. [41]. d Narrow inlet and outlet channels around deep chamber for cell trapping fabricated in COC.…”

Section: Trapping Cells On Membranes or In Regular Arraysmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

FISH and chips: a review of microfluidic platforms for FISH analysis

Rodriguez-Mateos

Azevedo

Almeida

et al. 2020

Med Microbiol Immunol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Microfluidic fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assay was fabricated based on conventional FISH technology to screen hematopoietic malignancies. The device detected minimal residual disease can analyze 10 samples in submicroliter volume at a time [67].…”

Section: Microfluidic Liquid Biopsy Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

ctDNA Detection in Microfluidic Platform: A Promising Biomarker for Personalized Cancer Chemotherapy

Gauri

Ahmad

2020

Journal of Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early detection and characterization of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can reveal mint of comprehensive biological insights from indicating the presence of tumor, identifying mutational changes of malignant cells, and allowing precision or targeted therapy together with monitoring disease progression, treatment resistance, and relapse of the disease. Apart from these, one of the greatest axiomatic implications of ctDNA detection is that it provides a new shed of light as noninvasive liquid biopsy as a replaceable procedure of surgical tumor biopsy. Despite the tremendous potential of ctDNA in cancer research, there remains a paucity of quantitative study on ctDNA detection and analysis. The majority of previously published microfluidic-based studies have focused on circulating tumor cell (CTC) detection and have failed to address the potential of ctDNA. The studies on microfluidic ctDNA detection are not consistent might be due to the complexity of ctDNA isolation as they present in low concentration in blood plasma. Researchers need to leverage the ability of microfluidic system for ctDNA analysis so that the significant enigma about cancer can be resolved effectively. This study, therefore, highlights the importance of ctDNA as cancer biomarker for liquid biopsy and provides an overview of the current laboratory as well as microfluidic techniques for ctDNA detection. This paper also attempts to show the emergence of new strands of microfluidic ctDNA detection and analysis for personalized cancer chemotherapy.

show abstract

“…Microfluidic channels etched into a glass slide, called FISHing lines, allowed processing 10 samples on a glass slide with 0.2 µ L of FISH probe. MRD screening using BCR/ABL fusion gene for chronic myeloid leukemia was performed by Mughal et al [29] Here we demonstrate a microfluidic device for both immunophenotyping and FISH analysis of rare biological cells enriched from clinical samples, such as blood (i.e., liquid biopsies). The device consisted of an array of 80,000 microtraps generated by cross-channels (2 -4 µ m in width and depth) connecting a network of interleaving fluidic channels.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microfluidic Device for On-Chip Immunophenotyping and Cytogenetic Analysis of Rare Biological Cells

Weerakoon-Ratnayake¹,

Vaidyanathan²,

Larkey³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of circulating plasma cells (CPCs) and circulating leukemic cells (CLCs) as biomarkers for several blood cancers, such as multiple myeloma and leukemia, respectively, have recently been reported. These markers can be attractive due to the minimally invasive nature of their acquisition through a blood draw (i.e., liquid biopsy) negating the need for painful bone marrow biopsies. CPCs or CLCs can be used for cellular/molecular analyses, such as immunophenotyping or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). FISH, which is typically carried out on slides involving complex workflows, becomes problematic when operating on CLCs or CPCs due to their relatively modest numbers. Here, we present a microfluidic device for characterizing CPCs and CLCs enriched from peripheral blood using immunofluorescence or FISH. The microfluidic possessed an array of cross-channels (2-4 µm in depth and width) that interconnected a series of input and output fluidic channels. Placing a cover plate over the device formed microtraps, the size of which was defined by the width and depth of the cross-channels. This microfluidic chip allowed for automating immunofluorescence and FISH requiring the use of small volumes of reagents, such as antibodies and probes, as compared to slide-based immunophenotyping and FISH. In addition, the device could secure FISH results in <4 h compared to 2-3 d for conventional FISH.

show abstract

Microfluidic channel‐assisted screening of hematopoietic malignancies

Cited by 17 publications

References 25 publications

FISH and chips: a review of microfluidic platforms for FISH analysis

FISH and chips: a review of microfluidic platforms for FISH analysis

ctDNA Detection in Microfluidic Platform: A Promising Biomarker for Personalized Cancer Chemotherapy

Microfluidic Device for On-Chip Immunophenotyping and Cytogenetic Analysis of Rare Biological Cells

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About