Skip to main content

Pre-analytic Workflow and Specimen Evaluation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Molecular Diagnostics in Cytopathology
  • 1075 Accesses

Abstract

An optimal pre-analytic workflow is a proactive adaptation to the demands of molecular pathology and takes into account the strengths and weaknesses of one’s practice environment. Ideally, the pre-analytic retrieval, evaluation, and preparation of cases for molecular testing are done efficiently with minimal disruption to conventional diagnostic services and done well to ensure trustworthy test results. Depending on practice environment, the potential need for molecular testing may also impact sample collection and preparation.

The first requirement of a proper pre-analytic evaluation is an understanding of the particular platforms used for testing and their analytic requirements. Immunoperoxidase stains and FISH studies are well established. PCR/NGS may be less familiar to the practicing pathologist and the input requirements less understood and more variable. These tests are characterized by two analytic thresholds – input DNA (minimum amount of DNA to obtain a signal) and tumor fraction (minimum percentage of tumor to ensure an observable tumor signal against a wild-type background). A careful pre-analytic evaluation scrutinizes the sample to ensure adequacy for testing and may require tumor mapping to enhance the tumor fraction. Although not intellectually challenging work, this does require great attention to detail, thoroughness, and some self-training.

Communication with the clinical team is especially important with marginally adequate samples at risk for a false-negative result and when triaging of multi-test requests is needed because of limited sample.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

CNB:

Core-needle biopsy

DQ:

Diff-Quik

EBUS-TBNA:

Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration

EHR:

Electronic health record

FFPE:

Formalin-fixed paraffin embedded

FISH:

Fluorescence in situ hybridization

FNA:

Fine-needle aspiration

IHC:

Immunohistochemistry

LBC:

Liquid-based cytology preparation (e.g., ThinPrep, SurePath)

NGS:

Next-generation sequencing

Pap:

Papanicolaou

PCR:

Polymerase chain reaction

TQL:

Tissue qualification laboratory

References

  1. Bellevicine C, Malapelle U, Vigliar E, Pisapia P, Vita G, Troncone G. How to prepare cytological samples for molecular testing. J Clin Pathol. 2017;70(10):819–26.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. da Cunha Santos G. Standardizing preanalytical variables for molecular cytopathology. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013;121(7):341–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. da Cunha Santos G, Saieg MA. Preanalytic specimen triage: smears, cell blocks, cytospin preparations, transport media, and cytobanking. Cancer Cytopathol. 2017;125(S6):455–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Tsao MS, Kerr K, Dacic S, et al. IASLC atlas of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry testing in lung cancer. 1st ed. Aurora: International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer: IASLC; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fitzgibbons PL, Bradley LA, Fatheree LA, Alsabeh R, Fulton RS, Goldsmith JD, et al. Principles of analytic validation of immunohistochemical assays: guideline from the College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014;138(11):1432–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Maxwell P, Salto-Tellez M. Validation of immunocytochemistry as a morphomolecular technique. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016;124(8):540–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Sauter JL, Grogg KL, Vrana JA, Law ME, Halvorson JL, Henry MR. Young investigator challenge: validation and optimization of immunohistochemistry protocols for use on cellient cell block specimens. Cancer Cytopathol. 2016;124(2):89–100.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gong Y, Symmans WF, Krishnamurthy S, Patel S, Sneige N. Optimal fixation conditions for immunocytochemical analysis of estrogen receptor in cytologic specimens of breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2004;102(1):34–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Smith AL, Williams MD, Stewart J, Wang WL, Krishnamurthy S, Cabanillas ME, et al. Utility of the BRAF p.V600E immunoperoxidase stain in FNA direct smears and cell block preparations from patients with thyroid carcinoma. Cancer Cytopathol. 2018;126(6):406–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Wobker SE, Kim LT, Hackman TG, Dodd LG. Use of BRAF v600e immunocytochemistry on FNA direct smears of papillary thyroid carcinoma. Cancer Cytopathol. 2015;123(9):531–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Betz BL, Dixon CA, Weigelin HC, Knoepp SM, Roh MH. The use of stained cytologic direct smears for ALK gene rearrangement analysis of lung adenocarcinoma. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013;121(9):489–99.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Knoepp SM, Roh MH. Ancillary techniques on direct-smear aspirate slides: a significant evolution for cytopathology techniques. Cancer Cytopathol. 2013;121(3):120–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Roh MH. The utilization of cytologic fine-needle aspirates of lung cancer for molecular diagnostic testing. J Pathol Translat Med. 2015;49(4):300–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Minca EC, Lanigan CP, Reynolds JP, Wang Z, Ma PC, Cicenia J, et al. ALK status testing in non-small-cell lung carcinoma by FISH on ThinPrep slides with cytology material. J Thoracic Oncol. 2014;9(4):464–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Goswami RS, Luthra R, Singh RR, Patel KP, Routbort MJ, Aldape KD, et al. Identification of factors affecting the success of next-generation sequencing testing in solid tumors. Am J Clin Pathol. 2016;145(2):222–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ranek L. Cytophotometric studies of the DNA, nucleic acid and protein content of human liver cell nuclei. Acta Cytologica. 1976;20(2):151–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Chen H, Luthra R, Goswami RS, Singh RR, Roy-Chowdhuri S. Analysis of pre-analytic factors affecting the success of clinical next-generation sequencing of solid organ malignancies. Cancers. 2015;7(3):1699–715.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Viray H, Li K, Long TA, Vasalos P, Bridge JA, Jennings LJ, et al. A prospective, multi-institutional diagnostic trial to determine pathologist accuracy in estimation of percentage of malignant cells. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137(11):1545–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Smits AJ, Kummer JA, de Bruin PC, Bol M, van den Tweel JG, Seldenrijk KA, et al. The estimation of tumor cell percentage for molecular testing by pathologists is not accurate. Modern Pathol. 2014;27(2):168–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John M. Stewart .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Stewart, J.M. (2019). Pre-analytic Workflow and Specimen Evaluation. In: Roy-Chowdhuri, S., VanderLaan, P., Stewart, J., Santos, G. (eds) Molecular Diagnostics in Cytopathology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97397-5_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97397-5_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-97396-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-97397-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics