The Evolution of Pre-analytic Factors in Anatomic Pathology

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Recent Results in Cancer Research book series (RECENTCANCER, volume 199)

Abstract

Anatomic Pathology has continuously evolved since launch by Virchow in Berlin. The era from 1990 to 2010 saw the rise of immunohistochemistry and its application for diagnosis, prognosis, and prediction of response to therapy. Currently the next wave of evolution is ongoing; molecular pathology, with emphasis on alterations to DNA, and expression of mRNA as biomarkers. The interrogation of biomolecules by specific probes is more demanding on specimens than the traditional application of histologic stains to tissue. This issue is juxtaposed to the fact that the majority of specimens are purely evaluated by histomorphology, for which current specimen practices are adequate. The capacity to identify a priori which cassette of tissue is appropriate for molecular analysis is difficult, if not impossible, the goal is to improve the quality of all pathology specimens in an economically viable model to enable advanced assay, when applicable.

Keywords

FFPE Tissue Anatomic Pathology Formalin Fixation Paraffin Embed Tissue Tissue Preservation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Fox CH, Johnson FB, Whiting J, Roller PP (1985) Formaldehyde fixation. J Histochem Cytochem 33(8):845–853PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chung JY, Braunschweig T, Williams R, Guerrero N, Hoffmann KM, Kwon M, Song YK, Libutti SK, Hewitt SM (2008) Factors in tissue handling and processing that impact RNA obtained from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue. J Histochem Cytochem 56(11):1033–1042PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lillie RD (1948) Histopathologic Technic, Blakiston Co., PhiladephiaGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hewitt SM, Lewis FA, Cao Y, Conrad RC, Cronin M, Danenberg KD, Goralski TJ, Langmore JP, Raja RG, Williams PM, Palma JF, Warrington JA (2008) Tissue handling and specimen preparation in surgical pathology: issues concerning the recovery of nucleic acids from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue. Arch Pathol Lab Med 132(12):1929–1935PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kononen J, Bubendorf L, Kallioniemi A, Bärlund M, Schraml P, Leighton S, Torhorst J, Mihatsch MJ, Sauter G, Kallioniemi OP (1998) Tissue microarrays for high-throughput molecular profiling of tumor specimens. Nat Med 4(7):844–847PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Battifora H (1986) The multitumor (sausage) tissue block: a novel method for immunohistochemical antibody testing. Lab Invest 55(2):244–8Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Xie R, Chung JY, Ylaya K, Williams RL, Guerrero N, Nakatsuka N, Badie C, Hewitt SM (2011) Factors influencing the degradation of archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue sections. J Histochem Cytochem 59(4):356–365PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Strand C, Enell J, Hedenfalk I, Fernö M (2007) RNA quality in frozen breast cancer samples and the influence on gene expression analysis–a comparison of three evaluation methods using microcapillary electrophoresis traces. BMC Mol Biol 22(8):38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chung JY, Braunschweig T, Hewitt SM (2006) Optimization of recovery of RNA from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue. Diagn Mol Pathol 15(4):229–236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer ResearchNational Cancer Institute, National Institutes of HealthBethesdaUSA

Personalised recommendations