Advertisement

Optimization of Immunostaining for Prospective Image Analysis

  • Scott M. LawrenceEmail author
  • Yelena G. Golubeva
Protocol
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1606)

Abstract

Biomarker discovery is a crucial part of the fast developing field of personalized medicine. Antibody-based techniques including immunostaining of tissue samples are widely used for biomarker evaluation in preclinical and clinical studies. When used in conjunction with robust image analysis methods, it provides a powerful means to assess biomarker modulation, toxicity, and patient response to targeted agents. Here, we describe the optimization of immunofluorescent (IF) staining protocols and a sample IF multiplex protocol suitable for colocalization image analysis.

Key words

Antibodies Immunofluorescence Multiplex IF Image acquisition Image Analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This Research was supported (in part) by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research. This project has been funded in whole or in part with federal funds from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, under Contract No. HHSN261200800001E. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of Health and Human Services, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the US government. The authors would like to thank staff of Clinical Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers Program, Applied/Developmental Research Directorate, and also Donna Butcher, Brad Gouker, and Simona Florea of Pathology-Histotechnology Laboratory, Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., and Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, USA, for technical assistance.

References

  1. 1.
    Straus SE, Sackett DL (1999) Applying evidence to the individual patient. Ann Oncol 10:29–32CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Khleif S, Doroshow J, Hait W (2010) N.AACR-FDA-NCI cancer biomarkers collaborative. AACR-FDA-NCI cancer biomarkers collaborative consensus report: advancing the use of biomarkers in cancer drug development. Clin Cancer Res 16:3299–3318CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Walk E (2010) Improving the power of diagnostics in the era of targeted therapy and personalized healthcare. Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel 13:226–234PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee J, Devanarayan V, Barrett Y et al (2006) Fit-for-purpose method development and validation for successful biomarker measurement. Pharm Res 23:312–328CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kummar S, Kinders R, Gutierrez M et al (2009) Phase 0 clinical trial of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor ABT-888 in patients with advanced malignancies. J Clin Oncol 27:2705–2711CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Coons A, Creech H, Jones R (1941) Immunological properties of an antibody containing a fluorescent group. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 47:200–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dunstan R, Wharton K, Quigley C et al (2011) The use of immunocytochemistry for biomarker assessment-can it compete with other technologies? Toxicol Pathol 39:988–1002CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rizzardi A, Johnson A, Vogel R et al (2012) Quantitative comparison of immunohistochemical staining measured by digital image analysis versus pathologist visual scoring. Diagn Pathol 7:42–52CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mosedale D, Metcalfe C, Grainger D (1996) Optimization of immunofluorescence methods by quantitative image analysis. J Histochem Cytochem 44:1043–1050CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wahlby C, Erlandsson F, Nyberg K et al (2001) Multiple tissue antigen analysis by sequential immunofluorescence staining and multi-dimensional image analysis. Proceeding of SCIA, pp 25–31Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Molyneux G, Smalley M (2011) The cell of origin of BRCA1 mutation-associated breast cancer: a cautionary tale of gene expression profiling. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 16:51–59CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen G, Gharib T, Huang C et al (2002) Discordant protein and mRNA expression in lung adenocarcinomas. Mol Cell Proteomics 4:304–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cummings J, Ward T, Dive C (2010) Fit-for-purpose biomarker validation for anticancer drug development. Drug Discov Today 15:816–825CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mass R (2006) erb-B2 as a therapeutic target. In: Gasparini G, Hayes D (eds) Biomarkers of breast cancer. Humana Press, Towtowa, NJ, p 15973Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wolff A, Hammond M, Schwartz J et al (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 131:18–43PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Petty H (2007) Fluorescence microscopy: established and emerging methods, experimental strategies, and applications in immunology. Microsc Res Tech 70:687–709CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Spring K (2003) Fluorescence microscopy. In: Encyclopedia of optical engineering. Mercel and Dekker, New York, NY, pp 548–555Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Michalet X, Kapanidis A, Laurence T et al (2003) The power and prospects of fluorescence microscopes and spectroscopies. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 32:161–182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wahlby C, Erlandsson F, Bengtsson E et al (2002) Sequential immunofluorescence staining and image analysis for detection of large numbers of antigens in individual cell nuclei. Cytometry 47:32–41CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Spruessel A, Steimann G, Jung M et al (2004) Tissue ischemia time affects gene and protein expression patterns within minutes following surgical tumor excision. BioTechniques 36:1030–1037PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Atkins D, Reiffen K, Tegtmeier C et al (2004) Immunohistochemical detection of EGFR in paraffin embedded tumor tissues: variation in staining intensity due to choice of fixative and storage time of tissue sections. J Histochem Cytochem 7:893–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Burns J, Li Y, Cheney C et al (2009) Choice of fixative is crucial to successful immunohistochemical detection of phosphoproteins in paraffin-embedded tumor tissues. J Histochem Cytochem 57:257–264CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Samaratunga H, Montironi R, True L et al (2011) International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical-prostatectomy specimens. Working group 1: specimen handling. Mod Pathol 24:5–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Best S, Sawyers Y, Fu V (2007) Integrity of prostatic tissue for molecular analysis after robotic-assisted laparoscopic and open prostatectomy. Urology 70:328–332CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Xie R, Chung J, Ylaya K et al (2011) Factors influencing the degradation of archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue sections. J Histochem Cytochem 59:356–365CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources CoLS, National Research Council (1996) Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., p 125Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Goldenthal K, Hedman K, Chen J et al (1985) Postfixation detergent treatment for immunofluorescence suppresses localization of some integral membrane proteins. J Histochem Cytochem 33:813–820CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Golubeva Y, Rogers K (2009) Collection and preparation of rodent tissue samples for histopathological and molecular studies in carcinogenesis. Methods Mol Biol 511:3–60CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fox C, Johnson F, Whiting J et al (1985) Formaldehyde fixation. J Histochem Cytochem 33:845–853CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Puchtler H, Meloan S (1985) On the chemistry of formaldehyde fixation and its effects on immunohistochemical reactions. Histochemistry 82:201–204CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hann B, Balmain A (2001) Building ‘validated’ mouse models of human cancer. Curr Opin Cell Biol 13:778–784CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Atkinson B, Walden B (eds) (1985) Changes in eukaryotic gene expression in response to environmental stress. Imprint Orlando Academic, Orlando, p 379Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mori N, Mizuno D, Goto S (1978) Increase in ratio of 18S RNA to 28 S RNA in cytoplasm of mouse tissues during aging. Mech Ageing Dev 8:285–297CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ross J (1995) mRNA stability in mammalian cells. Microbiol Rev 59:423–450PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kabnick K, Housman D (1998) Determinants that contribute to cytoplasmic stability of human c-fos and beta-globin mRNAs are located at several sites in each RNA. Mol Cell Biol 8:8–13Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Melan M, Sluder G (1992) Redistribution and differential extraction of soluble proteins in permeabilized cultured cells: implications for immunofluorescence microscopy. J Cell Sci 101:731–743PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Babic A, Loftin I, Stanislaw S et al (2010) The impact of pre-analytical processing on staining quality for H&E, dual hapten, dual color in situ hybridization and fluorescent in situ hybridization assays. Methods 52:287–300CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
  39. 39.
    Taylor C, Levenson R (2006) Quantification of immunohistochemistry-issues concerning methods, utility and semiquantitative assessment II. Histopathology 49:411–424CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Davis A, Richter A, Becker S et al (2014) Characterizing and diminishing autofluorescence in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded human respiratory tissue. J Histochem Cytochem 62:405–423CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Myers J (2006) Antigen retrieval: a review of commonly used methods and devices. MLO Med Lab Obs 38:10–15Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Shaner N, Steinbach P, Tsien R (2005) A guide to choosing fluorescent proteins. Nat Methods 2:905–909CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pawley J (1995) Handbook of biological confocal microscopy. Plenum Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Fluorescence quantum yields (QY) and lifetimes (Τ) for Alexa fluor dyes–Table 1.5 | Thermo Fisher Scientific (2016) http://www.thermofisher.com. Accessed 31 Mar 2016
  45. 45.
    Huang B (2012) Flourescent microscopy II. Fluorescent dyes. http://huanglab.ucsf.edu/Lectures/2012%20UCSF%20Fluorescence%20dyes.pdf. Accessed 31 Mar 2016
  46. 46.
    Burry R (2010) Immunocytochemistry. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lakowicz J (2006) Principles of fluorescence spectroscopy, 3rd edn. Plenum Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Khoury T, Sait S, Hwang H et al (2009) Delay to formalin fixation effect on breast biomarkers. Mod Pathol 22:1457–1467CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Stack E, Wang C, Roman K et al (2014) Multiplexed immunohistochemistry, imaging, and quantitation: a review, with an assessment of tyramide signal amplification, multispectral imaging and multiplex analysis. Methods 70:46–58CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pharmacodynamics Assay Section (PADIS), Laboratory of Human Toxicology and PharmacologyLeidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer ResearchFrederickUSA
  2. 2.MedImmuneGaithersburgUSA

Personalised recommendations