Processing technology for LCM samples

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 6528248
  • Patent Number
    6,528,248
  • Date Filed
    Monday, May 1, 2000
    24 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, March 4, 2003
    22 years ago
Abstract
Systems and methods are described for barriers on laser capture microdissection samples. A method of processing a biological sample for laser capture microdissection, includes: providing the biological sample; and applying a substance to the biological sample so as to provide a barrier between the biological sample and a surrounding environment. The systems and methods provide advantages because non-specific pick-up is reduced, visualization is improved, sample degradation is reduced, and contamination is reduced.
Description




BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION




1. Field of the Invention




The invention relates generally to the field of laser capture microdissection (LCM). More particularly, the invention relates to providing a biological sample with a polymer barrier prior to laser capture microdissection.




2. Discussion of the Related Art




LCM is a process by which cells and portions of biological tissue samples are acquired directly from tissue sections mounted on glass slides or other solid surfaces. The process involves placing a Capsure™ device, containing a thin-film polymer, onto the tissue section. Once the cells or tissue portions of interest (tissue targets) are located in the sample, a laser is focused over the tissue targets. When the laser is fired, the thin-film located directly above the tissue targets melts, flows down and adheres to the tissue targets. The Capsure™ device, holding the adhered tissue targets, is then removed from the tissue sample. The tissue targets are now stabilized on the Capsure™ device and ready for molecular analysis.




Currently, when Capsure™ devices make contact with a tissue section during LCM, the total working area of the Capsure™ device touches the surface of the tissue section. Due to the friable nature of tissue sections, loose material (whole cell or macromolecular) is likely to adhere to the surface of the Capsure™ device during LCM. This is known as non-specific transfer. Since LCM sample recovery involves extraction of the material on the surface of a Capsure™ device, any non-specific material transferred during LCM can cause sample contamination and adversely affect the quality and accuracy of downstream analyses.




Heretofore, the requirement of reducing or eliminating non-specific transfer during LCM has not been fully met. What is needed is a solution that addresses this requirement. The invention is directed to meeting this requirement, among others.




SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION




The principal goal of the invention is to satisfy the above-discussed requirement of reduction or elimination of non-specific transfer during LCM. It was reasoned that by applying a protective barrier or coating to biological tissue sections prior to LCM, loosely adhered tissue would be retained beneath the barrier, whereas tissue targets adhered to the melted polymer would easily be removed with the Capsure™ device. Another goal of the invention is to improve visualization of the sample during LCM. Another goal of the invention is to stabilize and retard degradation of biological samples being used for LCM or other types of biological analysis. Another goal of the invention is to reduce contamination of biological samples during storage before or after LCM.




One embodiment of the invention is based on a method of processing a biological sample for laser capture microdissection, comprising: providing the biological sample; and applying a substance to the biological sample so as to provide a barrier between the biological sample and a surrounding environment. Another embodiment of the invention is based on an article of manufacture, comprising: a biological sample that is to undergo laser capture microdissection; and a barrier coupled to at least a portion of said biological sample. Another embodiment of the invention is based on an article of manufacture, comprising: a portion of a biological sample that has undergone laser capture microdissection; and a barrier coupled to said portion of said biological sample. Another embodiment of the invention is based on a composition to process a biological sample for laser capture microdissection, comprising: a solvent; and solute in said solvent, said solute capable of forming a barrier on said biological sample. Another embodiment of the invention is based on a method, comprising: applying a substance to at least a portion of a biological sample that is to undergo laser capture microdissection.




Another embodiment of the invention is based on an apparatus to apply a substance to at least a portion of a biological sample that is to undergo laser capture microdissection, comprising: a container adapted to provide a fluid source of said substance, said container including an orifice that defines a principal plane that is substantially parallel to a primary direction of movement that is to be taken by said biological sample while said substance is being applied. Another embodiment of the invention is based on an apparatus to apply a substance to at least a portion of a biological sample that is to undergo laser capture microdissection, comprising: a dispensing device to deliver or apply a volume of fluid directly onto a biological sample. Delivery or application of the fluid volume to the sample can be in the form of a bead, droplet, spray dispersion, aerosol, spin-coat and/or drip-coat. Another embodiment of the invention is based on an apparatus to apply a substance to at least a portion of a biological sample that is to undergo laser capture microdissection, comprising: a release layer; and a solid layer of said substance coupled to said release layer. Another embodiment of the invention is based on an apparatus to apply a substance to at least a portion of a biological sample that is to undergo laser capture microdissection, comprising: a blade including an indexing surface and a surface to define a gap that defines a principal plane that is held at an acute angle with respect to a perpendicular to a primary direction of movement that is to be taken by said biological sample while said substance is being applied.




These, and other goals and embodiments of the invention will be better appreciated and understood when considered in conjunction with the following description and the accompanying drawings. It should be understood, however, that the following description, while indicating preferred embodiments of the invention and numerous specific details thereof, is given by way of illustration and not of limitation. Many changes and modifications may be made within the scope of the invention without departing from the spirit thereof, and the invention includes all such modifications.











BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS




A clear conception of the advantages and features constituting the invention, and of the components and operation of model systems provided with the invention, will become more readily apparent by referring to the exemplary, and therefore nonlimiting, embodiments illustrated in the drawings accompanying and forming a part of this specification, wherein like reference characters (if they occur in more than one view) designate the same parts. It should be noted that the features illustrated in the drawings are not necessarily drawn to scale.





FIGS. 1A-1B

illustrate micrographs of control samples that do not have a polymer barrier, appropriately labeled “prior art.”





FIGS. 2A-2B

illustrate micrographs of samples that do not have a polymer barrier imaged through a diffusing media, appropriately labeled “prior art.”





FIGS. 3A-3B

illustrate micrographs of samples with a polymer barrier, representing an embodiment of the invention.





FIGS. 4A-4B

illustrate micrographs of CAPSURE devices having on them portions of samples that did not have a polymer barrier prior to acquisition by LCM, appropriately labeled “prior art.”





FIGS. 5A-5C

illustrate micrographs of CAPSURE devices having on them portions of samples that had a polymer barrier prior to acquisition by LCM, representing an embodiment of the invention.





FIGS. 6A-6B

illustrate micrographs of samples that did not have a polymer barrier prior to acquisition by LCM, appropriately labeled “prior art.”





FIG. 6C

illustrates a micrograph a CAPSURE device having on it a portion of a sample that did not have a polymer barrier prior to acquisition by LCM, appropriately labeled “prior art.”





FIGS. 7A-7B

illustrate micrographs of samples and portion thereof that had a polymer barrier prior to acquisition by LCM, representing an embodiment of the invention.





FIG. 7C

illustrates a micrograph of a CAPSURE device having on it a portion of a sample that had a polymer barrier prior to acquisition by LCM, representing an embodiment of the invention.





FIG. 8

compares fluorescence as a function of the number of tissue targets between non-coated samples and 5% 200W coated samples, representing an embodiment of the invention.





FIG. 9

illustrates a schematic perspective view of a method of processing a biological sample, representing an embodiment of the invention.





FIGS. 10A-10C

illustrate schematic perspective views of a lamination process, representing an embodiment of the invention.





FIGS. 11A-11B

illustrate schematic views of a coating process, representing an embodiment of the invention.











DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS




The invention and the various features and advantageous details thereof are explained more fully with reference to the nonlimiting embodiments that are illustrated in the accompanying drawings and detailed in the following description of preferred embodiments. Descriptions of well known components and processing techniques are omitted so as not to unnecessarily obscure the invention in detail.




The purpose of this invention is to provide technology, that is compatible with LCM, to meet some or all of the following needs: prevent non-specific binding of sample to CapSure™; optimal visualization of samples: and stabilization of biological samples. The term “CapSure™” is used herein to generically refer to the combination of an integral portion of an analysis vessel that includes an LCM transfer film and an LCM transfer film carrier. Of course, the invention is not limited to CapSure™.




The invention can include laminating or coating a biological sample (cells or a portion of tissue ) mounted on a glass slide or other hard surface material, with a substance. Once the sample is coated, the substance acts to sequester the sample, providing a barrier between the sample and the surrounding environment. The purpose of this barrier is to prevent the sample from making contact with instruments or other items which may be used to manipulate the tissue.




The laminate or coating may be EVA (ethyl vinyl acetate) or some other polymer, modified to have specific properties required to facilitate this invention, or unmodified, and applied in a thickness to be determined. The laminate or coating will be applied to the sample by one of the following methods: dissolving the laminate or coating material supplied in powder, beads or other bulk form, in a solvent; dipping the slide containing the tissue sample into a quantity of the resulting solution; spraying or aerosolizing the laminate or coating solution onto the sample; delivering a volume of the laminate or coating solution onto the surface of the sample. Other application methods may include liquefying the laminate or coating and rolling the slide between rollers (the rollers may be heated and/or cooled); melting a thin sheet of laminate or coating onto the slide using a heat block: and melting a thin sheet of laminate or coating onto the slide with an IR (infrared) sweep. Additional application methods may include spin coating and/or doctor blading, optionally with the below discussed glider device. Also a laminate can be simply pressed onto the tissue without heat.




Application of the laminate or coating to the sample does not interfere with normal handling and processing of the sample, LCM or molecular analysis of the sample. The laminated or coated samples will have the same or better visual appearance as non-coated tissue samples. The laminate or coating will not impede or retard successful LCM transfer of cells or portion of the tissue or prevent access to cells or portions of the tissue for any form of biological analysis.




The invention can include providing a clear coat of polymer on a tissue sample. One embodiment of the invention is based on ELVAX™ 200W diluted in 100% xylene. Xylene is a common histological solvent, known to be compatible with all tissue types and routinely used in tissue preparation for LCM. Rapid xylene evaporation expedites film formation (on evaporation, no polymerization, per se occurs) of the laminate or coating and drying of the sample. The invention can be applied directly to a slide after normal staining or processing. The invention therefore involves only one new step in sample preparation protocol.




The invention (some embodiments of which can be referred to as POLYSLIP™ and/or POLY-SLIP™) was developed as a means of coating the tissue section in order to isolate the surface of the section from the surface of the Capsure™ device. This method of contact surface separation would eliminate the possibility of non-specific material transferring from tissue to Capsure™ devices. Consequently, only tissue targeted for microdissection would be transferred to the Capsure™ device after LCM. This ensures the homogeneity of cell samples collected by LCM and prevents contamination of LCM samples with unwanted macromolecules. During our preliminary testing of the invention, both coated and non-coated tissue sections were microdissected. Pictures of Capsure™ devices used in both procedures are shown in

FIGS. 4A-4B

,


5


A-


5


C,


6


C and


7


C. Referring to

FIGS. 4A-4B

,


5


A-


5


C,


6


C and


7


C, it is very evident that non-specific material is not present on Capsure™ devices used in laser capture microdissection of inventive coated tissue sections.




The invention can be made from an ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) polymer, ELVAX™ 200W, diluted with 100% xylene. ELVAX™ 200W is available in pellet or powdered form, which facilitates dissolution in xylene. Since the xylene evaporates rapidly, the invention quickly forms a film and dries on the sample. The invention can be applied directly to tissue sections after staining and processing, as a single additional step in the sample preparation protocol.




We wish to evaluate the feasibility of developing the invention as a product. Our initial feasibility testing program is outlined below.




Initial Product Specifications




1) Performance




a) Reduction of non-specific transfer by 100% when compared to non-coated tissue sections




b) Target tissue transfer and recovery efficiency of 100% when compared to transfer and recovery from non-coated sections




c) Retention of current tissue visualization ability and target capture features (diameter of wetting area; collateral (immediately peripheral to target area) material transfer), relative to non-coated tissue




d) Demonstration of compatibility with currently used molecular processing methods (PCR, GelElectrophoresis, Molecular Hybridization methods . . . )




e) Demonstration of stability of the invention for at least 90 days




i) in xylene solution, sealed in a glass container, at room temperature




f) Demonstration of stability of tissue sections coated in the invention for at least 90 days




i) no evidence of tissue degradation, or reduction in macromolecular content or function




ii) no change in LCM transfer efficiency during that time




2) Application Method




a) Demonstration tissue sample types




i) 5 micron paraffin-embedded tissue sections




ii) Leukocyte enriched blood smears




b) Application process




i) Apply even coating




ii) Air dry 5 minutes




iii) Perform LCM according to standard procedures




c) Expected application time—5 minutes (including drying)




d) Special application equipment requirements—undetermined




e) Additional LCM instrumentation or equipment modification requirements—none




3) Formulation and Packaging




a) small volume (25-50 ml.) of fluid in sealed glass container




Technical Feasibility Evaluation Goals




1) Product Design Specifications




a) Define preliminary formulation




b) Define preliminary application method




2) Theoretical Performance Report




a) LCM transfer efficiency (compared to un-coated samples)




b) Macromolecule (DNA, RNA, Protein) extraction and recovery efficiency (compared to un-coated samples)




c) Compatibility with current molecular analysis methods (PCR)




d) Stability of preliminary formulation




e) Stability of tissue sections coated with the invention (compared to un-coated samples)




Prototypes were made with EVA (i.e., ELVAX™ 200W) dissolved in xylene (i.e., 100% xylene) with and without dye. Operational results with these prototypes are discussed below.




Referring to

FIGS. 1A-1B

,


2


A-


2


B, and


3


A-


3


B, the visualization advantages of the invention can be appreciated.

FIGS. 1A-1B

show two views of a sample without a polymer barrier.

FIGS. 2A-2B

show two views of the sample shown in

FIGS. 1A-1B

, but imaged through a diffusing media.

FIGS. 3A-3B

show two views of a sample with a polymer barrier. It can be appreciated that the quality of the visualization shown in

FIGS. 3A-3B

is surprisingly superior compared to the visualization shown in either

FIGS. 1A-1B

or

FIGS. 2A-2B

.




Referring to

FIGS. 4A-4B

and


5


A-


5


C, the non-specific transfer advantages of the invention can be appreciated.

FIGS. 4A-4B

show images of an LCM transfer film (seen through an LCM transfer film carrier) both before LCM acquisition of a sample portion from a sample that did not have a polymer barrier (

FIG. 4A

) and after (FIG.


4


B).

FIGS. 5A-5B

show an images of an LCM transfer film (seen through an LCM transfer film carrier) both before LCM acquisition of a sample portion from a sample that had a polymer barrier (

FIG. 5A

) and after (FIG.


5


B).

FIG. 5C

shows a close-up of the sample portion shown in FIG.


5


B. The substantial absence of non-specific transfer with the use of the invention is clearly evident.




Referring to

FIGS. 6A-6C

and


7


A-


7


C, both the visualization and non-specific transfer advantages of the invention can be appreciated.

FIGS. 6A-6C

show visualizing before LCM, visualizing after LCM, and the resulting transferred portion of a sample that did not have a barrier, respectively. In contrast,

FIGS. 7A-7C

show visualizing before LCM, visualizing after LCM, and the resulting transferred portion of a sample that had a barrier, respectively. It can be appreciated that visualizing is significantly improved and non-specific transfer is significantly reduced as a result of the barrier. Currently, when Capsure™ devices make contact with a tissue section during Laser Capture Microdissection (LCM), the total working area of the Capsure™ device touches the surface of the tissue section. Due to the friable nature of tissue sections, loose material (whole cell or macromolecular) is likely to adhere to the Capsure™ device during LCM. This is known as non-specific transfer. Since LCM sample recovery involves extraction of the material on the surface of a Capsure™ device, any non-specific material present can cause sample contamination.




The invention was developed as a means of coating the tissue section in order to isolate the surface of the section from the surface of the Capsure™ device. This method of contact surface separation would eliminate the possibility of non-specific material transferring from tissue to Capsure™ devices. Consequently, only tissue targeted for microdissection would be transferred to the Capsure™ device after LCM. This ensures the homogeneity of cell samples collected by LCM and prevents contamination of LCM samples with unwanted macromolecules.




Applying the substance to a tissue section prior to LCM merely requires applicators and application methods that are compatible with current tissue preparation methods. Extracting substance coated material from the Capsure™ device surface is compatible with extraction methods, and buffers, and can be used under the various temperature requirements normally part of molecular analysis protocols.




Substance Formulations Tested




Table 1 lists some formulations that have been used in different experiments to demonstrate their ability to abate non-specific transfer and still permit microdissection of tissue sections.












TABLE 1











Compositions

















NS detected on






POLYMER




SOLVENT




%




sample

















Elvax 200W




Cyclohexane




.9




None






Elvax 200W




Cyclohexane/Ether 30/70




.2




Low






Elvax 200W




Cyclohexane/Ether 30/70




.6




None






Elvax 200W




Cyclohexane/Ether 30/70




.9




None






Elvax 200W




Cyclohexane/Pentane 30/70




.9




None






Elvax 200W




Xylene




.9




None






Elvax 200W




Xylene




1




None






Elvax 200W




Xylene




2.5




Low






Elvax 200W




Xylene




5




None






Elvax 200W




Xylene




7.5




None






Elvax 200W




Xylene




10




None






Elvax 450




Cyclohexane




1




None






Elvax 450




Xylene




1




None






Paraffin Mp. 56° C.




Xylene




1




Low






Paraplast ™




Cyclohexane




1




Low






Poly α-metyl styrene




Xylene




1




None






Polyester Wax Mp.




Xylene




1




Low






37° C.














The following section is descriptive generally for either liquid or solid embodiments of the invention. In most cases a polymeric material is desirable, but in some cases the materials are not polymers. For example, paraffin and polyester waxes are useful, but do not fall into the class of materials commonly referred to as polymers.




In addition to using a solid film and coating from solution, one could use a system which undergoes curing. The curing could be from monomers, or could involve crosslinking of a polymeric solution. If the curing is done from monomers, it would be possible to have a solvent free liquid system. Examples of curable systems can be acrylic, urethane, or epoxy chemistry.




The materials for use in the invention must be optically transparent, and should have little to no color. In order to use them in the liquid application method, they must be soluble or dispersible in the solvent used. It is desirable that they be film-forming materials, but that is not an absolute requirement. The film of material must have a cohesive strength which is less than the tissue so that only the tissue in contact with the selected tissue portion is transferred. In some cases it is useful for the inventive materials to undergo softening when heated.




The following materials are suitable for use with the invention:




Waxes or low molecular weight oligomers—Paraffin, Polyester, Wax




Polyethylene—especially low molecular weight




Ethylene co-polymers such as poly (ethylene-co-vinyl acetate) (EVA), and poly(ethylene-co-acrylic acid) (EAA).




Acrylates, urethanes, epoxies




Water borne polymers and oligomers—such as Polyvinyl alcohol (PVA), Polyvinyl Pyrolidone (PVP), Polyethylene oxide (PEO), Polyethylene glycol (PEG), and Poly acrylic acid.




Polyisobutylene




Methods of Application




1) Referring to

FIG. 9

, an apparatus for applying the inventive composition to a glass slide mounted biological sample is depicted. A slide


200


is pulled along underneath an orifice


210


in a container


220


through which a barrier forming solution


230


flows.




2) Referring to

FIGS. 11A-11B

, one method of application which is a subset of the invention is a device


350


which fits over a microscope slide


300


, indexes off of a surface


310


, and creates a fixed gap which spreads the fluid evenly when pulled across the surface of the slide. The device


350


includes a first recess


320


that indexes on the surface


310


. The device


350


also includes a second recess


330


that sets a gap for spreading the coating


320


. An operator can slide the device


350


across the slide


300


to form an even coat of substance. This device can be referred to as a glider.




An experiment will now be described. The objective of this experiment was to test the level of Non-Specific abatement provided by the inventive formulation 5% ELVAX™ 200W in xylene (5% 200W).




Two Hematoxylin/Eosin(H&E)-stained brain tissue sections from the same lot were selected for this experiment. One was coated with a thin layer of 5% 200W. An uncoated H&E-stained brain section was used as a control. Target cells (500, 250, 100, 50, 10 and 5 per section) were Laser Capture Microdissected (LCM) from each section. One blank Capsure™ device was included as a control for each sample set.




Cellular material was extracted using a Proteinase K-based extraction protocol. Extracted material was treated with PicoGreen® fluorescent DNA Quantitation solution and then quantitated on a Packard Fluorcount® Fluorimeter.




Total fluorescence for samples and controls was measured on the Fluorcount® Fluorimeter and recorded. Background fluorescence in the system was established by measuring the total fluorescence of a volume of the Proteinase K extraction buffer equivalent to that of each sample and control.




As shown in Table 2 and

FIG. 8

, non-coated tissue samples gave variable fluorescence readings, with no apparent correlation between the number of cells in the sample and sample fluorescence. On the other hand, 5% 200W coated tissue samples showed a reasonably linear relationship (r


2


=0.9751) between the number of targets and both total and corrected sample fluorescence. Coated samples also had an overall lower fluorescence level than non-coated samples.




It is reasonable to conclude that the presence of non-specific material could account for both the variability of fluorescence in the non-coated tissue samples, as well as the increased fluorescence, when compared to coated tissue samples.












TABLE 2











Sample Fluorescence






Coated vs. Uncoated Samples













TARGETS →



















500




250




100




50




10




5




Blank























Non-Coated Tissue




TSF




44531




18437




26166




27125




19882




6657




3852







CSF




42645




16551




24281




25238




17106




4770




1965






5% 200W Coated Tissue




TSF




25866




18507




9276




7349




4010




4478




3680







CSF




23980




16621




7389




5463




2124




2592




1794











LEGEND - TSF - Total Sample Fluorescence; CSF - Corrected Sample Fluorescence (Digestion Buffer Blank TF was subtracted from Sample TF)













Another experiment will now be described. The objective of this experiment was to test the level of non-specific abatement provided by the inventive composition of ELVAX™ 200W in xylene (5% 200W).




Unstained human brain sections were used for this experiment. Sections were coated with 5% 200W. Control sections were uncoated. Laser capture microdissection (LCM) was done in highly nucleated areas of the section, with each target acquiring between 1 and 2 nuclei per shot, as well as matrix material. 50 LCM targets were captured in each sample and 10 samples were taken from both the coated and non-coated sections




Samples were extracted with a Proteinase K extraction buffer. The extracted samples were treated with PICOGREEN™ Fluorescent DNA Quantitation solution and then quantitated on a Molecular Dynamics FLUORIMAGER™.




Fluorescent readings were taken for each sample and the median pixel fluorescence (MPF) for each sample was recorded. Background fluorescence in the system was established by measuring the total fluorescence of a volume of the Proteinase K extraction buffer equivalent to that of each sample and control. A corrected MPF (cMPF) was determined by subtracting the background fluorescence from the MPF of each sample and control.




The fluorescence data is shown in Table 3. The average cMPF value for 10 samples from uncoated sections was 15.75 (s.d. 9.58). The average mPF value for 10 5% 200W samples was 3.30 (s.d. 0.67). The high variability of sample fluorescence in the uncoated sections, as compared to coated sections, would seem to indicate the presence of non-specific material in the sample.












TABLE 3











Fluorescent Readings













Sample




Uncoated Section




5% 200W Coated Section






#




Control cMPF




Sample cMPF









1




 6.46




3.54






2




 4.16




2.87






3




27.52




3.34






4




 8.50




3.42






5




 7.65




3.54






6




12.46




3.30






7




19.31




3.06






8




15.46




2.91






9




31.57




4.84






10 




24.45




2.22






Mean




15.75 ± 9.59




3.30 ± 0.67














An experiment will now be described. The following materials were used:




slides with blood-smear tissue samples;




blank slides with no tissue sample for polymer coating only;




polymer solutions: paraffin wax with cyclohexane solvent;




Slide glider of clearance of 0.015″ and width 25.4″, and slide spinner with slide holder, both were used for spreading polymer solutions.




Regular Capsure™ devices and 4 um rail Capsure™ devices were experimented with. Life savers are adhesive acrylic “doughnuts” which adhere to the bottom of the Capsure™ device and define an extraction volume of 10 microliters (well diameter=0.125 in . . . The objective of this experiment was to test the level of Non-Specific abatement provided by the inventive formulations described in the next paragraph.




Two sets of polymer solutions with cyclohexane solvent at concentration of 2.5% (g wt. polymer by ml volume solvent), and the other set included each polymer mixed with Cyclohexane at 5% concentration. 2.5% solutions were prepared by mixing 0.25 g of polymer with 10 ml of solvent, and similarly 5% solutions were made by mixing 0.50 g of polymer with 10 ml of solvent. Polymers normally dissolved after placing bottled solutions in water bath at 32.5° C. for 10-15 minutes. Four solutions in all were made based on two polymers and two concentrations.




Coated each of the polymer solutions at 2.5% concentration on three blood tissue slides, using the glider method. When applying with glider, 30 uL volume of polymer solution was pipetted just in front of the tissue and immediately spread with the glider held at 30° angle with respect to the perpendicular and drawn quickly over the slide. Also coated each of the 5% polymer solutions on one blood tissue slide, using the slide spinner. When using spinner method, 40 uL volume of polymer solution was placed in the slide holder so that 20 uL went in each hole at top of holder. Each slide was spun at high speed and time settings (DD settings).




Eight slides in all were coated, 6 using each of the 2.5% polymer solution applied with the glider (3 slides with Paraffin and 3 with Polyester-Wax), and 2 using each of the 5% polymer solution applied with the spinner (1 with Paraffin and 1 with Polyester-Wax). The similar coated slides were used for different Capsure™ device types (regular and rail) and different extraction methods (with or no life savers). Please see experiment outline for clarification.




Applied each of the 2.5% and the 5% polymer solutions on a blank slides (4 slides all together) with no tissue sample on slide. This is done to test for any fluorescence contribution from the polymer coating.




After polymer solution application, every slide was left under the hood for 45 min to dry then placed in desiccator for 4 hours before performing LCM. The thickness of the polymer layer is estimated at 4-6 um or less.




For each polymer coated slide, 4 Capsure™ devices were used. For sets using regular Capsure™ devices and no life saver extraction method, LCM was performed at 5 locations, one in the middle and the others around, half way between middle point and edge. In each location, 15 shots were fired, totaling to 75 shots per Capsure™ device. For sets using rail Capsure™ devices and regular Capsure™ devices with life saver extraction method, 75 shots were fired at center of Capsure™ device. Acquisition was performed using a commercial LCM instrument at setting of 0.8-1.0 ms duration and 50-80 mW power, with multiple firing (2-3 times). An LCM instrument was used to confirm the number of successful shots and verify extraction in post stained Capsure™ devices.




Extraction was performed on the paraffin coated blank slides and paraffin coated blood smear slides, using regular and rail Capsure™ devices, with or without life savers. These samples had reasonable shot capture efficiency and low non specific cell count. At a later time, PCR was performed on 2.5% Paraffin coated blood smear samples. PCR was successful.




The results summarized in Table 4 below show good tissue transfer, low levels of non-specific cells, and effective extraction of DNA from cells.




Blank paraffin coated slides (2.5 and 5%) were also extracted, and pico green analysis and visual inspection indicated no fluorescence contribution from polymer.




To verify extraction, the Capsure™ devices are restained and examined with an LCM instrument to visually determine extraction efficiency. Apparently most Capsure™ devices were left in heating block during extraction too long which resulted in melting of Capsure™ devices' surfaces. Only five Capsure™ devices were not damaged and verification was performed on them, showing that extraction occurred 100%.












TABLE 4











LCM Results for Blank and Blood Smear Slides Coated with






Paraffin in Cyclohexane Solutions





















Estimated




Estimated










Shots




cells




Non-specific




Extraction








Shots




capture




captured




cells




eff. %






Sample




Cap #




attempted




eff. %




(visual)




(visual)




(visual)









Blank (no tissue)




1B*




75






0




(not performed)






with 2.5% soln




2B




75






0






Paraffin with glider




3B




75






0







4B




75






0







total




300 






0






2.5% Paraffin with




1B




75




45%




42




4




***






glider regular caps




2B




75




92%




89




100 




100%






no life saver




3B




75




80%




76




0




***







4B




75




92%




96




6




100%







total




300 




78%




303 




110 




▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪▪






2.5% Paraffin with




1B




75




11%




 8




0




***






glider regular caps




2B




75




89%




79




1




***






with life saver




3B




75




92%




76




0




***







4B




75




97%




92




0




***







total




300 




72%




255 




1






2.5% Paraffin with




1R*




75




95%




79




0




***






glider rail caps




2R




75




89%




93




0




100%






with life saver




3R




75




100% 




87




0




***







4R




75




97%




100 




0




100%







total




300 




95%




359 




0






5% Paraffin with




1B




75




63%




52




6




***






spinner regular caps




2B




75




88%




74




22 




100%






no life saver




3B




75




81%




78




11 




***







4B




75




79%




69




11 




***







total




300 




78%




273 




50 




***











*B = caps manufactured with automated method. and R = rail caps of 4 um height










***These caps' surfaces were deformed due to staying in heat block too long during extraction













Another example will now be described. The following materials were used:




Tissue Samples: Nine blood-smear tissue samples were used, one for control (no invention), and eight for inventive polymer coating.




Polymer Solutions: Paraffin and Polyester Wax polymers were used along with Cyclohexane and xylene solvents.




Slide glider of clearance of 0.015″ and slide spinner, both were used for spreading polymer solution.




Capsure™ devices made from new manufacturing method (type B) were used. Capsure™ devices came from lots #99K15B and #99L16B.




Two sets of polymer solutions were prepared, one set included each polymer mentioned above mixed with Cyclohexane, and the other set included each polymer mixed with xylene solvent. Each polymer solution was prepared by mixing 0.5 g polymer to 20 ml of solvent (2.5% wt. by volume solutions). Polymers normally dissolved after placing bottled solutions in water bath at 32.5° C. for 10-15 minutes. Four solutions in all were made based on two polymers and two solvents.




Coated each of the polymer solutions on two blood tissue slides, using the glider method on one slide and the spinner method on the other. For the glider method, 30 uL volume of polymer solution was pipetted just in front of the tissue and immediately spread with the 0.015″ glider held at 30° angle with respect to the perpendicular. For the spinner method, 40 uL volume of polymer solution was placed in the slide holder so that 20 uL went in each hole at top of holder. Each slide was spun at medium speed and time (cc settings). Eight slides in all were coated, 4 using each of the polymer solution applied with the glider, and 4 using each of the polymer solution applied with the spinner.




After polymer solution application, every slide was left under the hood for 4 hours to dry then placed in desiccator overnight before performing LCM. The thickness of the polymer layer is estimated at 4-6 um or less.




For the control and each polymer coated slide, 4 Capsure™ devices were used. For each Capsure™ device LCM was performed at 5 locations, one in the middle and the others around, half way between middle point and edge. In each location, 15 shots were fired (except for control's two first Capsure™ devices at 10 shots/location) at LCM instrument setting of 1-1.2 ms duration and 52-65 mW power. Each Capsure™ device then should have 75 shots total attempted. Fluorescence light was not available when firing shots. However, an LCM with fluorescence Capsure™ deviceability was used to confirm number of successful shots afterwards.




Extraction was performed on the control and only half of the coated tissue samples due to low shot capture efficiency and/or high non-specific count on some sample Capsure™ devices. Extraction was not performed on the later samples.




The results of this example are summarized in Tables 5 and 6. Capturing efficiency was high for control samples (no inventive coating) as well as Paraffin in Cyclohexane ones (using glider) as indicated in Table 4 Non-specific count was high in control Capsure™ devices (100-500) while it dropped dramatically for samples mentioned above (0-131).




Extraction on control and selected inventive samples was successful 100% based on visual inspection (restaining Capsure™ devices post extraction). Quantification of cells captured, however, is difficult to estimate from the pico-green analysis, but evident of extraction is apparent and the trend is established.












TABLE 5











LCM Results for Control and Polymer/Cyclohexane Samples





















Estimated




Estimated










Shots




cells




Non-specific




Extraction








Shots




capture




captured




cells




eff. %






Sample




Cap #




attempted




eff. %




(visual)




(visual)




(visual)









Control




1B*




50




100% 




70




>150




(not performed)






(no polyslip coating)




2B




50




100% 




80




  100







3B




75




99%




128 




>500







4B




75




99%




121 




>500







total




250 




99%




399 




>1250 






Polyester-Wax in




1B




75




27%




22




   0




100%






Cyclohexane with glider




2B




75




13%




10




   0




100%







3B




75




28%




24




   0




100%







4B




75




40%




34




   0




100%







total




300 




27%




90




   0




100%






Paraffin in




1B




75




77%




79




   52




100%






Cyclohexane with glider




2B




75




75%




65




   22




100%







3B




75




88%




84




   10




100%







4B




75




79%




71




   31




100%







total




300 




80%




299 




  115




100%






Polyester-Wax in




1B




75




37%




32




   45




(not performed)






Cyclohexane with spinner




2B




75




47%




38




   45







3B




75




21%




18




   39







4B




75




16%




12




   95







total




300 




30%




100 




  224






Paraffin in




1B




75




71%




69




   30




(not performed)






Cyclohexane with spinner




2B




75




87%




75




  100







3B




75




85%




80




  100







48




75




88%




84




  100







total




300 




83%




308 




  330











*B = caps manufactured with automated method










***These caps were not extracted due to low shot capt. eff. % and/or high non-specific cells





















TABLE 6











LCM Results for Polymer/Xylene Samples





















Estimated




Estimated










Shots




cells




Non-specific




Extraction








Shots




capture




captured




cells




eff. %






Sample




Cap #




attempted




eff. %




(visual)




(visual)




(visual)









Polyester-Wax in




1B*




75




43%




39




 0




100%






Xylene with glider




2B




75




71%




57




30




100%







3B




75




56%




51




15




100%







4B




75




47%




49




20




100%







total




300 




54%




196 




65




100%






Paraffin in




1B




75




19%




15




100 




(not performed)






Xylene with glider




2B




75




 0%




 0




 4







3B




75




19%




19




30







48




75




 0%




 0




 0







total




300 




 9%




34




134 






Polyester-Wax in




1B




75




40%




35




70




100%






Xylene with spinner




2B




75




72%




58




25




100%







3B




75




80%




73




 2




100%







4B




75




81%




67




40




100%







total




300 




68%




233 




137 




100%






Paraffin in




1B




75




59%




51




300 




(not performed)






Xylene with spinner




2B




75




52%




55




200 







3B




75




63%




58




500 







4B




75




47%




40




200 







total




300 




55%




204 




1200 











*B = caps manufactured with automated method










***These caps were not extracted due to low shot capt. eff. % and/or high non-specific cells













Non Specific Barrier Film




Another embodiment of the invention will now be described. The purpose of this invention is to prevent contaminating material from migrating from the surface of the tissue slide to the Capsure™ device EVA film.




This embodiment includes a thin layer of transfer adhesive (substance) constructed on a release liner. The transfer adhesive can be extruded or solvent coated on to a liner which has its surface adherence controlled to effect a ‘release’. The thickness of the substance can be controlled by line speed on a web, the temperature of a chill roll and the screw speed of an extruder, if an extrusion process used. If a knife-over coater process is used, then coat weight and percentage solids loading concentration in the solvent, in conjunction with line speed and coat roll depth can be utilized to keep the thickness of the substance within specification.




The substance which is to form the barrier layer should be chosen to be a compatible polymer, or polymer blend, to mix with the hot melt adhesive (transfer film) used in LCM. An example of this is ELVAX™ 200W, which is an ethyl vinyl acetate (EVA). Other choices would be blends of EVAs, and/or alloys of EVA and LDPE or wax. The melt index and melt temperature would be chosen to interact in a complimentary way with the LCM process.




Referring to

FIGS. 10A-10C

, a film


100


is made sandwiched between two layers


110


,


120


of release liner (e.g., Polyester). In use, one of the layers (e.g.,


120


) is peeled back and discarded and the upper layer


110


with the film


100


(aka substance, barrier, transfer adhesive) is layered on top of a tissue section


130


located on a microscope slide


140


. Gentle pressure and/or heat is then applied to preferentially adhere the film


100


to the tissue


130


and glass


140


. The assembly is allowed to cool and the upper liner


110


is then peeled back and discarded. The tissue sample


130


on the slide has been effectively covered with a transfer adhesive barrier layer and is now ready for LCM. In this way, the tissue


130


has been protected from touching the surface of the LCM transfer device (transfer film) by the presence of the barrier film. The invention reduces non-specific transfer. Hence, no contamination from non-specifically bound tissue is possible. The LCM process is unaffected by the barrier because it miscibly interacts with the transfer film. The barrier goes with the acquired portion of the tissue and the Capsure™ device after the micro-dissection has been performed.




The context of the invention includes laser capture microdissection. The context of the invention also includes handling, purification and/or analysis of biological material obtained via laser capture microdissection.




The invention can also be included in a kit. The kit can include some, or all, of the components that compose the invention. More specifically, the kit can include the ingredients that compose the composition, a container to hold the composition and/or ingredients, and other components of the invention such as dye(s) and/or applicator(s). The kit can also contain instructions for practicing the invention and apparatus for carrying out the invention. Unless otherwise specified, the components (and apparatus and/or instructions) of the kit can be the same as those used in the invention.




The below-referenced U.S. Patent and U.S. Patent Applications disclose embodiments that were satisfactory for the purposes for which they were intended. The entire contents of U.S. Pat. No. 5,985,085 are hereby expressly incorporated by reference into the present application as if fully set forth herein. The entire contents of U.S. Ser. Nos. 08/800,882; 09/018,452: 09/121,691; 09/121,635; 09/058,711; 09/121,677; 09/208,604; 09/538,862; 09/344,612; 08/984,979; and 09/357,423 are hereby expressly incorporated by reference into the present application as if fully set forth herein.




The term approximately, as used herein, is defined as at least close to a given value (e.g., preferably within 10% of, more preferably within 1% of, and most preferably within 0.1% of). The term substantially, as used herein, is defined as at least approaching a given state (e.g., preferably within 10% of, more preferably within 1% of, and most preferably within 0.1% of). The term coupled, as used herein, is defined as connected, although not necessarily directly, and not necessarily mechanically.




While not being limited to any particular performance indicator, preferred embodiments of the invention can be identified one at a time by testing for improved visualization. The test for the presence of improved visualization can be carried out without undue experimentation by the use of a simple and conventional optical microscope experiment. The apparent contrast of detail within the samples can be characterized, both with and without dyes. Another way to seek preferred embodiments one at a time is to test for reduced non-specific pick-up. The test for reduced non-specific pick-up can be carried out without undue experimentation by the use of a post LCM inspection of the size and shape of the portion of the sample that remains adhered to the LCM transfer film. The amount of sample still adhered to the LCM transfer film beyond the spot diameter can be measured (with optional variation of power density), with special attention being given to asymmetric non-specific transfers as undesirable. Another way to seek preferred embodiments one at a time is to test for reduced sample degradation (with optional variation of storage times before LCM). The test for reduced sample degradation can be carried out without undue experimentation by testing the accuracy of diagnostic assays on LCM acquired portions of samples that are known to be positive.




All the disclosed embodiments of the invention described herein can be realized and practiced without undue experimentation. Although the best mode of carrying out the invention contemplated by the inventors is disclosed above, practice of the invention is not limited thereto. Accordingly, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that the invention may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described herein.




For example, the individual components need not be formed in the disclosed shapes, or assembled in the disclosed configuration, but could be provided in virtually any shape, and assembled in virtually any configuration. Further, the individual components need not be fabricated from the disclosed materials, but could be fabricated from virtually any suitable materials. Further, although the barrierized samples described herein can be physically separate modules, it will be manifest that the barrierized samples may be integrated into additional apparatus with which they are associated. Furthermore, all the disclosed elements and features of each disclosed embodiment can be combined with, or substituted for, the disclosed elements and features of every other disclosed embodiment except where such elements or features are mutually exclusive.




It will be manifest that various additions, modifications and rearrangements of the features of the invention may be made without deviating from the spirit and scope of the underlying inventive concept. It is intended that the scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims and their equivalents cover all such additions, modifications, and rearrangements.




The appended claims are not to be interpreted as including means-plus-function limitations, unless such a limitation is explicitly recited in a given claim using the phrase “means for.” Expedient embodiments of the invention are differentiated by the appended subclaims.



Claims
  • 1. A method of processing a sample for laser capture microdissection, comprising:providing a sample; mounting the sample on a surface; providing a transfer film; providing a barrier layer adapted to substantially eliminate non-specific transfer of the sample to the transfer film; applying the barrier layer over the sample; placing the transfer film in juxtaposition to the sample; activating the transfer film; and transferring a portion of the sample to the transfer film.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein said substance is provided as a liquid and applying said substance includes coating said liquid on said biological sample.
  • 3. The method of claim 2, wherein coating includes at least one technique selected from the group consisting of spraying, dipping and dripping.
  • 4. The method of claim 2, wherein coating includes at least one technique selected from the group consisting of rolling and spin coating.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier layer is provided as a film and applying said substance includes laminating said film to the sample.
  • 6. The method of claim 5, wherein laminating includes melting.
  • 7. The method of claim 6, wherein melting includes melting with a heat block.
  • 8. The method of claim 6, wherein melting includes melting with an infrared sweep.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein mounting the sample on a surface includes mounting the sample on a glass slide.
  • 10. The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier layer includes a polymer.
  • 11. The method of claim 10, wherein said polymer includes ethyl vinyl acetate.
  • 12. The method of claim 10, wherein said polymer includes polyester.
  • 13. The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier layer includes paraffin.
  • 14. The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier layer includes a solvent.
  • 15. The method of claim 14, wherein the solvent includes xylene.
  • 16. The method of claim 14, wherein the solvent includes cyclohexane.
  • 17. The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier layer includes a dye.
  • 18. The method of claim 1, further comprising laser capture microdissecting the sample.
  • 19. The method of claim 1 further including the step of providing a removable layer coupled to the barrier layer.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application is a continuation-in-part under 35 U.S.C. §120 of copending U.S. Ser. No. 60/131,863, filed Apr. 29, 1999, now pending, the entire contents of which are hereby incorporated herein by reference as if fully set forth herein.

US Referenced Citations (126)
Number Name Date Kind
3680947 Wanesky Aug 1972 A
3705769 Johannsmeier Dec 1972 A
3836231 Cole, Jr. Sep 1974 A
3848962 Nelson Nov 1974 A
3939019 Pickett Feb 1976 A
4205059 von Hagens May 1980 A
4210384 Meyer et al. Jul 1980 A
4303866 Porro et al. Dec 1981 A
4333983 Allen Jun 1982 A
4436385 Fischer et al. Mar 1984 A
4508435 Graham et al. Apr 1985 A
4509834 Hodgson Apr 1985 A
4538885 Graham et al. Sep 1985 A
4552033 Märzhäuser Nov 1985 A
4600282 Yamamura et al. Jul 1986 A
4614431 Komeyama Sep 1986 A
4624915 Schindler et al. Nov 1986 A
4627009 Holmes et al. Dec 1986 A
4629687 Schindler et al. Dec 1986 A
4673261 Hunt et al. Jun 1987 A
4684781 Frish et al. Aug 1987 A
4702565 Schilling et al. Oct 1987 A
4731530 Mikan Mar 1988 A
4807984 Kurimura et al. Feb 1989 A
4824229 Narita et al. Apr 1989 A
4836667 Ozeki Jun 1989 A
4852985 Fujihara et al. Aug 1989 A
4856873 Kleinberg Aug 1989 A
4871245 Ishikawa et al. Oct 1989 A
4920053 Inoue et al. Apr 1990 A
4923294 Courtenay May 1990 A
4954715 Zöld Sep 1990 A
4964708 Mason Oct 1990 A
4987006 Williams et al. Jan 1991 A
4992660 Kobayashi Feb 1991 A
5017428 Mecke et al. May 1991 A
5029791 Ceccon et al. Jul 1991 A
5057689 Nomura et al. Oct 1991 A
5077620 Mauro Dec 1991 A
5089909 Kleinberg Feb 1992 A
5103338 Crowley et al. Apr 1992 A
5126877 Biber Jun 1992 A
5143552 Moriyama Sep 1992 A
5162941 Favro et al. Nov 1992 A
5165297 Krueger Nov 1992 A
5173802 Heller Dec 1992 A
5173803 Heller Dec 1992 A
5202230 Kamentsky Apr 1993 A
5225326 Bresser et al. Jul 1993 A
5253110 Ichihara et al. Oct 1993 A
5262891 Nakasato Nov 1993 A
5263384 Suzuki Nov 1993 A
5280384 Shibasaki Jan 1994 A
5288996 Betzig et al. Feb 1994 A
5296291 Mueller Mar 1994 A
5296963 Murakami et al. Mar 1994 A
5298963 Moriya et al. Mar 1994 A
5312393 Mastel May 1994 A
5323009 Harris Jun 1994 A
5337178 Kung et al. Aug 1994 A
5345333 Greenberg Sep 1994 A
5357366 Marchlenski Oct 1994 A
5359417 Müller et al. Oct 1994 A
5367401 Saulietis Nov 1994 A
5378675 Takeyama et al. Jan 1995 A
5386112 Dixon Jan 1995 A
5393647 Neukermans et al. Feb 1995 A
5403970 Aoki Apr 1995 A
5412503 Nederlof May 1995 A
5420716 Fukaya May 1995 A
5434703 Morizumi Jul 1995 A
5450233 Yamamoto et al. Sep 1995 A
5455420 Ho et al. Oct 1995 A
5468967 Chan et al. Nov 1995 A
5471260 Luce et al. Nov 1995 A
5479252 Worster et al. Dec 1995 A
5492837 Naser-Kolahzadeh et al. Feb 1996 A
5492861 Opower Feb 1996 A
5504366 Weiss et al. Apr 1996 A
5506725 Koike et al. Apr 1996 A
5510615 Ho et al. Apr 1996 A
5517353 Ikoh et al. May 1996 A
5531997 Cochrum Jul 1996 A
5532128 Eggers et al. Jul 1996 A
5532476 Mikan Jul 1996 A
5532873 Dixon Jul 1996 A
5535052 Jörgens Jul 1996 A
5536941 Swann Jul 1996 A
5537863 Fujiu et al. Jul 1996 A
5541064 Bacus et al. Jul 1996 A
5552928 Furuhashi et al. Sep 1996 A
5556790 Pettit Sep 1996 A
5557456 Garner et al. Sep 1996 A
5558329 Liu Sep 1996 A
5559329 Joseph et al. Sep 1996 A
5578832 Trulson et al. Nov 1996 A
5587748 Luce et al. Dec 1996 A
5587833 Kamentsky Dec 1996 A
5598888 Sullivan et al. Feb 1997 A
5602674 Weissman et al. Feb 1997 A
5619035 Weiss et al. Apr 1997 A
5621207 O'Mara Apr 1997 A
5631734 Stern et al. May 1997 A
5638206 Sumiya et al. Jun 1997 A
5659421 Rahmel et al. Aug 1997 A
5665582 Kausch et al. Sep 1997 A
5707801 Bresser et al. Jan 1998 A
5723290 Eberwine et al. Mar 1998 A
5728527 Singer et al. Mar 1998 A
5751839 Drocourt et al. May 1998 A
5759781 Ward et al. Jun 1998 A
5817462 Garini et al. Oct 1998 A
5843644 Liotta et al. Dec 1998 A
5843657 Liotta et al. Dec 1998 A
5859699 Baer et al. Jan 1999 A
5985085 Baer et al. Nov 1999 A
6010888 Liotta et al. Jan 2000 A
6100051 Goldstein et al. Aug 2000 A
6157446 Baer et al. Dec 2000 A
6184973 Baer et al. Feb 2001 B1
6204030 Liotta et al. Mar 2001 B1
6215550 Baer et al. Apr 2001 B1
6251467 Liotta et al. Jun 2001 B1
6251516 Bonner et al. Jun 2001 B1
6277648 Colpan Aug 2001 B1
20010031481 Liotta et al. Oct 2001 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (25)
Number Date Country
566 015 Aug 1975 CH
196 03 996 Aug 1997 DE
0 409 550 Jan 1991 EP
WO 9107683 May 1991 WO
WO 9402646 Feb 1994 WO
WO 9523960 Sep 1995 WO
WO 9530919 Nov 1995 WO
WO 9713838 Apr 1997 WO
WO 9835215 Aug 1998 WO
WO 9835216 Aug 1998 WO
WO 9900658 Jan 1999 WO
WO 9909390 Feb 1999 WO
WO 9917094 Apr 1999 WO
WO 9919341 Apr 1999 WO
WO 9939176 Aug 1999 WO
WO 9945094 Sep 1999 WO
WO 0006992 Feb 2000 WO
WO 0034756 Jun 2000 WO
WO 0034757 Jun 2000 WO
WO 0049410 Aug 2000 WO
WO 0049410 Aug 2000 WO
WO 0066994 Nov 2000 WO
WO 0068662 Nov 2000 WO
WO 0068662 Nov 2000 WO
WO 0133190 May 2001 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (29)
Entry
Allred, C. D. and Mohsin, S. K. (2000). “Biological Features of Human Premalignant Brest Disease,” Chapter 24 In Disease of the Breast, 2nd ed., J. R. Harris, ed., Lippicott Williams & Wilkins: Philadelphia, pp. 355-366.
Ashkin, A. and Dziedzic, J.M. (1989). “Internal Cell Manipulation Using Infrared Laser Traps,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86:7914-7918.
Bentley-Lawrence, J. et al. (1988). “Sensitive, High-Resolution Chromatin and Chromosome Mappin In Situ: Presence and Orientation of Two Closely Integrated Copies of EBV in a Lymphoma Line,” Cell 52:51-61.
Bonner, R. F. et al. (Nov. 21, 1997). “Laser Capture Microdissection: Molecular Analysis of tissue,” Science 278(5342):1481 and 1483.
Brignole, E. (2000). “Laser-Capture Microdissection,” pp. 1-4, located at only 3 pages <<http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/mdd/v03/i09/html/toolbox.html≦≦ from Modern Drug Discovery, 3(9):69-70, No Mention of Magazine.
Chu, S. S. et al. (2000). “Laser Capture Microdissection: Applications in Cancer Research,” Biomedical Product 251p58:1-3.
Chui, G. (1999). “The Ecosystems Within” Section F, Science & Technology San Jose Mercury News pp. 1-5.
Emmert-Buck, M. R. et al. (1996). “Laser Capture Microdissection,” Science 274:998-1001.
Friend, T. (1997). “Microdissection on Breakthrough Lets Scientist Isolate Those Involved in Tumor Growth,” Printed in USA Today Newspaper, Science Section, 2 pages.
Fukui, K. et al. (Jun. 1992). “Microdissection of Plant Chromosomes by Argon-Ion Laser Beam,” Theoretical & Applied Genetics 84:787-791.
Goldstein, S. R. et al. (1998). “Thermal Modeling of Laser Capture Microdessection,” Appllied Optics 37(31):7378-7391.
Goldsworthy, S. M. et al. (1999). “Effects of Fixation on RNA Extraction and Amplification from Laser Capture Microdissected Tissue” Molecular Carcinogenesis 25:86-91.
Harlow and Lane, eds. (1988). Antibodies: A Laboratory Manual Cold Spring Harbor, New York: pp. iii-ix (Table of Contents Only).
Heng, H.H.Q. et al. (1992). “High-Resolution Mapping of Mammalian Genes by In Situ Hybridization to Free Chromatin,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89:9509-9513.
Isenberg, G. et al. (1976). “Cell Surgery by Laser Micro-Dissection: a Preparative Method,” J. Microsc. 107(Pt 1):19-24.
Jiménez, C. R. et al. (1994). “Neuropeptide expression and processing as revealed by direct matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization mass spectrometry of single neurons,” Journal of Neurochemistry 62(1):404-407.
Kubo, Y. et al. (1995). “Early Detection of Knudson's Two-Hits in Preneoplastic Renal Cells of the Eker Rat Model by the Laser Microdissection Procedure,” Cancer Research 55(5):989-990.
Kuska, B. (1996). “New Aim-and-Shoot Technique Speeds up Cell Analysis,” J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 88(23):1708-1709.
Lewis, R. (1998). “Laser Aids Alzheimer's Study,” Biophotonics International pp. 40-41.
Lichter, P. et al. (1990). “High-Resolution Mapping of Human Chromosome 11 by In Situ Hybridization with Cosmid Clones,” Science 247:64-69.
Manuelidis, L. et al. (1982). “High-Resolution Mapping of Satellite DNA Using Biotin-Labeled DNA Probes,” The J. Cell. Biol. 95:619-625.
Meier-Ruge, W. et al. (1976). “The Laser in the Lowry Technique for Microdissection of Freeze-Dried Tissue Slices,” Histochemical Journal 8:387-401.
Relman, D. A. (1999). “The Search for Unrecognized Pathogens”, Science 284: 1308-1310.
Schindler, M. (1998). “Select, microdissect & eject,” Nature Biotechnology 16:719-720.
Schindler, M. et al. (1985). “Automated Analysis & Survival Selection of Anchorage-Dependent Cells under Normal Growth Conditions,” Cytometry 6(4):368-374.
Schütze, K. and Lahr, Georgia (Aug. 1998). “Identification of Expressed Genes by Laser-Mediated Manipulation of Single Cells,” Nature Biotechnology 16:737-742.
van den Engh, Ger et al. (1992). “Estimating Genomic Distance from DNA Sequence Location in Cell Nuclei by a Random Walk Model,” Science 257:1410-1412.
Veigel, Claudia et al. (1994). “New Cell Biological Applications of the Laser Microbeam Technique: the Microdissection and Skinning of Muscle Fibers and the Perforation and Fusion of Sacrolemma Vesicles,” European Journal of Cell Biology 63:140-148.
Simone, N.L. et al. (1998). “Laser-Capture Microdissection: Opening the Microscopic Frontier to Molecular Analysis,” Trends In Genetics 14(7):272-276.
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60/131863 Apr 1999 US