Comparison of pre-analytical FFPE sample preparation methods and their impact on massively parallel sequencing in routine diagnostics.

Over the last years, massively parallel sequencing has rapidly evolved and has now transitioned into molecular pathology routine laboratories. It is an attractive platform for analysing multiple genes at the same time with very little input material. Therefore, the need for high quality DNA obtained...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Carina Heydt, Jana Fassunke, Helen Künstlinger, Michaela Angelika Ihle, Katharina König, Lukas Carl Heukamp, Hans-Ulrich Schildhaus, Margarete Odenthal, Reinhard Büttner, Sabine Merkelbach-Bruse
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/25105902/?tool=EBI
id doaj-1b0a555199ba457291e8cd96ba50cc96
record_format Article
spelling doaj-1b0a555199ba457291e8cd96ba50cc962021-03-04T09:09:26ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-0198e10456610.1371/journal.pone.0104566Comparison of pre-analytical FFPE sample preparation methods and their impact on massively parallel sequencing in routine diagnostics.Carina HeydtJana FassunkeHelen KünstlingerMichaela Angelika IhleKatharina KönigLukas Carl HeukampHans-Ulrich SchildhausMargarete OdenthalReinhard BüttnerSabine Merkelbach-BruseOver the last years, massively parallel sequencing has rapidly evolved and has now transitioned into molecular pathology routine laboratories. It is an attractive platform for analysing multiple genes at the same time with very little input material. Therefore, the need for high quality DNA obtained from automated DNA extraction systems has increased, especially to those laboratories which are dealing with formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) material and high sample throughput. This study evaluated five automated FFPE DNA extraction systems as well as five DNA quantification systems using the three most common techniques, UV spectrophotometry, fluorescent dye-based quantification and quantitative PCR, on 26 FFPE tissue samples. Additionally, the effects on downstream applications were analysed to find the most suitable pre-analytical methods for massively parallel sequencing in routine diagnostics. The results revealed that the Maxwell 16 from Promega (Mannheim, Germany) seems to be the superior system for DNA extraction from FFPE material. The extracts had a 1.3-24.6-fold higher DNA concentration in comparison to the other extraction systems, a higher quality and were most suitable for downstream applications. The comparison of the five quantification methods showed intermethod variations but all methods could be used to estimate the right amount for PCR amplification and for massively parallel sequencing. Interestingly, the best results in massively parallel sequencing were obtained with a DNA input of 15 ng determined by the NanoDrop 2000c spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). No difference could be detected in mutation analysis based on the results of the quantification methods. These findings emphasise, that it is particularly important to choose the most reliable and constant DNA extraction system, especially when using small biopsies and low elution volumes, and that all common DNA quantification techniques can be used for downstream applications like massively parallel sequencing.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/25105902/?tool=EBI
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Carina Heydt
Jana Fassunke
Helen Künstlinger
Michaela Angelika Ihle
Katharina König
Lukas Carl Heukamp
Hans-Ulrich Schildhaus
Margarete Odenthal
Reinhard Büttner
Sabine Merkelbach-Bruse
spellingShingle Carina Heydt
Jana Fassunke
Helen Künstlinger
Michaela Angelika Ihle
Katharina König
Lukas Carl Heukamp
Hans-Ulrich Schildhaus
Margarete Odenthal
Reinhard Büttner
Sabine Merkelbach-Bruse
Comparison of pre-analytical FFPE sample preparation methods and their impact on massively parallel sequencing in routine diagnostics.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Carina Heydt
Jana Fassunke
Helen Künstlinger
Michaela Angelika Ihle
Katharina König
Lukas Carl Heukamp
Hans-Ulrich Schildhaus
Margarete Odenthal
Reinhard Büttner
Sabine Merkelbach-Bruse
author_sort Carina Heydt
title Comparison of pre-analytical FFPE sample preparation methods and their impact on massively parallel sequencing in routine diagnostics.
title_short Comparison of pre-analytical FFPE sample preparation methods and their impact on massively parallel sequencing in routine diagnostics.
title_full Comparison of pre-analytical FFPE sample preparation methods and their impact on massively parallel sequencing in routine diagnostics.
title_fullStr Comparison of pre-analytical FFPE sample preparation methods and their impact on massively parallel sequencing in routine diagnostics.
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of pre-analytical FFPE sample preparation methods and their impact on massively parallel sequencing in routine diagnostics.
title_sort comparison of pre-analytical ffpe sample preparation methods and their impact on massively parallel sequencing in routine diagnostics.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2014-01-01
description Over the last years, massively parallel sequencing has rapidly evolved and has now transitioned into molecular pathology routine laboratories. It is an attractive platform for analysing multiple genes at the same time with very little input material. Therefore, the need for high quality DNA obtained from automated DNA extraction systems has increased, especially to those laboratories which are dealing with formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) material and high sample throughput. This study evaluated five automated FFPE DNA extraction systems as well as five DNA quantification systems using the three most common techniques, UV spectrophotometry, fluorescent dye-based quantification and quantitative PCR, on 26 FFPE tissue samples. Additionally, the effects on downstream applications were analysed to find the most suitable pre-analytical methods for massively parallel sequencing in routine diagnostics. The results revealed that the Maxwell 16 from Promega (Mannheim, Germany) seems to be the superior system for DNA extraction from FFPE material. The extracts had a 1.3-24.6-fold higher DNA concentration in comparison to the other extraction systems, a higher quality and were most suitable for downstream applications. The comparison of the five quantification methods showed intermethod variations but all methods could be used to estimate the right amount for PCR amplification and for massively parallel sequencing. Interestingly, the best results in massively parallel sequencing were obtained with a DNA input of 15 ng determined by the NanoDrop 2000c spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). No difference could be detected in mutation analysis based on the results of the quantification methods. These findings emphasise, that it is particularly important to choose the most reliable and constant DNA extraction system, especially when using small biopsies and low elution volumes, and that all common DNA quantification techniques can be used for downstream applications like massively parallel sequencing.
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/25105902/?tool=EBI
work_keys_str_mv AT carinaheydt comparisonofpreanalyticalffpesamplepreparationmethodsandtheirimpactonmassivelyparallelsequencinginroutinediagnostics
AT janafassunke comparisonofpreanalyticalffpesamplepreparationmethodsandtheirimpactonmassivelyparallelsequencinginroutinediagnostics
AT helenkunstlinger comparisonofpreanalyticalffpesamplepreparationmethodsandtheirimpactonmassivelyparallelsequencinginroutinediagnostics
AT michaelaangelikaihle comparisonofpreanalyticalffpesamplepreparationmethodsandtheirimpactonmassivelyparallelsequencinginroutinediagnostics
AT katharinakonig comparisonofpreanalyticalffpesamplepreparationmethodsandtheirimpactonmassivelyparallelsequencinginroutinediagnostics
AT lukascarlheukamp comparisonofpreanalyticalffpesamplepreparationmethodsandtheirimpactonmassivelyparallelsequencinginroutinediagnostics
AT hansulrichschildhaus comparisonofpreanalyticalffpesamplepreparationmethodsandtheirimpactonmassivelyparallelsequencinginroutinediagnostics
AT margareteodenthal comparisonofpreanalyticalffpesamplepreparationmethodsandtheirimpactonmassivelyparallelsequencinginroutinediagnostics
AT reinhardbuttner comparisonofpreanalyticalffpesamplepreparationmethodsandtheirimpactonmassivelyparallelsequencinginroutinediagnostics
AT sabinemerkelbachbruse comparisonofpreanalyticalffpesamplepreparationmethodsandtheirimpactonmassivelyparallelsequencinginroutinediagnostics
_version_ 1714807398288326656