Use of automated microscopy for the detection of disseminated tumor cells in bone marrow samples

The use of automated microscopy has reached the maturity necessary for its routine use in the clinical pathology laboratory. In the following study we compared the performance of an automated microscope system (MDS™) with manual method for the detection and analysis of disseminated tumor cells prese...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Cytometry (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2001-08, Vol.46 (4), p.215-221
Main Authors: Borgen, Elin, Naume, Bjørn, Nesland, Jahn M., Nowels, Kent W., Pavlak, Nancy, Ravkin, Ilya, Goldbard, Simon
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
automated microscopy
automated screening
bone marrow
Bone Marrow Examination - instrumentation
Bone Marrow Examination - methods
Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis
carcinoma
Carcinoma - diagnosis
Carcinoma - secondary
disseminated tumor cell
Female
Humans
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - instrumentation
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods
Immunohistochemistry
Mass Screening - instrumentation
Mass Screening - methods
micrometastasis
neoplasm metastasis
Neoplasm Metastasis - diagnosis
Neoplastic Cells, Circulating
Reproducibility of Results
Sensitivity and Specificity
Single-Blind Method
Tumor Cells, Cultured
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The use of automated microscopy has reached the maturity necessary for its routine use in the clinical pathology laboratory. In the following study we compared the performance of an automated microscope system (MDS™) with manual method for the detection and analysis of disseminated tumor cells present in bone marrow preparations from breast carcinoma patients. The MDS System detected rare disseminated tumor cells among bone marrow mononuclear cells with higher sensitivity than standard manual microscopy. Automated microscopy also proved to be a method of high reproducibility and precision, the advantage of which was clearly illustrated by problems of variability in manual screening. Accumulated results from two pathologists who had screened 120 clinical slides from breast cancer patients both by manual microscopy and by use of the MDS System revealed only two (3.8%) missed by the automatic procedure, whereas as many as 20 out of 52 positive samples (38%) were missed by manual screening. Cytometry (Comm. Clin. Cytometry) 46:215–221, 2001. © 2001 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
ISSN:0196-4763
1097-0320
DOI:10.1002/cyto.1130