Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Automation of Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Pretreatment: A Comparative Study of Different Sample Types

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Molecular Diagnosis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: In fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) applications, the efficiency of probe hybridization is greatly enhanced by treating the cell or tissue preparation with a variety of reagents that make the target permeable while preserving important morphological features. Pretreatment protocols can be very labor intensive, adding cost to the test. The automation of specimen pretreatment eliminates human variation in the procedure through standardization of such variables as treatment times and temperatures.

Methods and Results: We developed an instrument, the VP 2000 Processor, that can process up to 50 specimens simultaneously under computer control. In this comparative FISH study of matched specimens, one set was processed according to the manual pretreatment protocol and compared with specimens processed by the VP 2000. Processed specimen types included paraffin-embedded breast tissue, uncultured amniocytes, bone marrow, peripheral-blood lymphocytes, and uroepithelial cells recovered from urine. Data show equivalent or brighter and more specific overall signal quality compared with matched manually executed controls.

Conclusions: The automation of sample pretreatment for FISH provides a superior, more consistent level of performance than the manual format.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hopman AHN, Poddighe P, Moesker O, Ramaekers FCS: Interphase cytogenetics: An approach to the detection of genetic aberrations in tumors. In McGee JO, Herrington CS: Diagnostic molecular pathology: A practical approach. New York, NY, IRL Press, 1991, pp. 141-167

  2. Hopman AH, Voorter CE, Ramaekers FC: Detection of genomic changes in cancer by in situ hybridization. Mol Biol Rep 1994;19:31–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Pinkel D, Straume T, Gray JW: Cytogenetic analysis using quantitative, high sensitivity fluorescence hybridization. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1986;83: 2934–2938

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hyytinen E, Visakorpi T, Kallioniemi A, Kallioniemi OP, Isola JJ: Improved technique for analysis of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumors by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Cytometry 1994;16: 93–99

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kapranos N, Kontogergos G, Frangia K, Kokka E: Effect of fixation on interphase cytogenetic analysis by direct fluorescence in situ hybridization on cell imprints. Biotechnol Histochem 1997;72:148–151

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Persons DL, Bui MM, Lowery MC, et al.: Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for detection of Her-2/neu amplification in breast cancer: A multicenter portability study. Ann Clin Lab Sci 2000;1: 41–48

    Google Scholar 

  7. Abati A, Sanford JS, Fetsch P, Marincola FM, Wolman SR: Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH): A user’s guide to optimal preparation of cytologic specimens. Diagn Cytopathol 1995;13:486–492

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Grogan TM: Automated immunohistochemical analysis. Am J Clin Pathol 1992;98(Suppl 1):S35–S38

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Assay Development, Vysis, Inc, 3100 Woodcreek Dr, Downers Grove, Illinois, 60515

    Kristine Jacobson MS, Anthony Thompson MA, Gerry Browne BS, Christina Shasserre MS, Steven A. Seelig MD & Walter King PhD (Director)

Authors
  1. Kristine Jacobson MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anthony Thompson MA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gerry Browne BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christina Shasserre MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Steven A. Seelig MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Walter King PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Walter King PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jacobson, K., Thompson, A., Browne, G. et al. Automation of Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Pretreatment: A Comparative Study of Different Sample Types. Molecular Diagnosis 5, 209–220 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03262078

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03262078

Keywords

Search

Navigation