Comparison of Automated and Manual DNA Isolation Methods of Liquid-Based Cytology Samples Academic Article in Scopus uri icon

abstract

  • © Irma G. Domínguez-Vigil et al., 2019; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 2019.Liquid-based cytology (LBC) has been used as a diagnostic tool for cervical cancer for years and is now being adopted for other gynecological cancers. LBC represents an important challenge to ensure that the process yields representative biospecimens for quality control (QC) of diagnostic procedures. In this study, we compare QC parameters (integrity, yield and purity, and polymerase chain reaction [PCR] amplification) of DNA isolated from LBC (N = 296) using two different nucleic acid isolation methods, manual (n = 233) or automated (n = 63). We also evaluated two different types of cytological brushes for sampling from the cervix. Our results suggest that manual isolation (yield 22.81 ± 1.92 ¿g) resulted in increased DNA recovery when compared with automated isolation (yield 9.96 ± 1.11 ¿g) from LBC samples, with a p-value of <0.0003. We estimated that 98% (53/54) of the samples preserved the integrity of DNA and were suitable for standard molecular biology analyses. The ß-globin gene was amplified in 100% (296/296) of the DNA samples by endpoint PCR. We found no significant difference between the performance of the cytological brushes (p value of <0.6711) in a general overview. However, when looking at the results from using each brush individually, the manual isolation method was statistically superior to the automated method. Our work illustrates the impact of good QC of preanalytic conditions, which will be important for the application of LBC for developing early detection methods for gynecological cancers.

publication date

  • December 1, 2019