Olga Kofanova

Development of novel biomarkers for diagnosis of disease and assessment of treatment efficacy utilizes a wide range of biospecimens for discovery research. The fitness of biospecimens for the purpose of biomarker development depends on the clinical characteristics of the donor and on a number of critical and potentially uncontrolled pre-analytical variables. Pre-analytical factors influence the reliability of the biomarkers to be analyzed and can seriously impact analytic outcomes. Sample quality stratification assays and tools can be utilized by biorepositories to minimize bias resulting from samples' inconsistent quality. In this study, we evaluated the quality of biobanked specimens by comparing analytical outcomes at 1, 5, and 10 years after collection. Our results demonstrate that currently available assays and tools can be used by biobank laboratories to support objective biospecimen qualification. We have established a workflow to monitor the quality of different types of biospecimens and, in this study, present the results of a qualification exercise applied to fluid samples and their derivatives in the context of urological diseases.

Biopreservation and Biobanking

In this study, we tested to which extent possible between-center differences in standardized operating procedures (SOPs) for biobanking of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples influence the homogeneity of the resulting aliquots and, consequently, the concentrations of the centrally analyzed selected Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers. Proficiency processing samples (PPSs), prepared by pooling of four individual CSF samples, were sent to 10 participating centers, which were asked to perform aliquoting of the PPSs into two secondary aliquots (SAs) under their local SOPs. The resulting SAs were shipped to the central laboratory, where the concentrations of amyloid beta (Aβ) 1–42, pTau181, and albumin were measured in one run with validated routine analytical methods. Total variability of the concentrations, and its within-center and between-center components, were analyzed with hierarchical regression models. We observed neglectable variability in the concentrations of pTau181 and albumin across the centers and the aliquots. In contrast, the variability of the Aβ1–42 concentrations was much larger (overall coefficient of variation 31%), with 28% of the between-laboratory component and 10% of the within-laboratory (i.e., between-aliquot) component. We identified duration of the preparation of the aliquots and the centrifugation force as two potential confounders influencing within-center variability and biomarker concentrations, respectively. Proficiency processing schemes provide objective evidence for the most critical preanalytical variables. Standardization of these variables may significantly enhance the quality of the collected biospecimens. Studies utilizing retrospective samples collected under different local SOPs need to consider such differences in the statistical evaluations of the data.

Background: Longer pre-centrifugation times alter the quality of serum and plasma samples. Markers for such delays in sample processing and hence for the sample quality, have been identified.Methods: Twenty cytokines in serum, EDTA plasma and citrate plasma samples were screened for changes in concentration induced by extended blood pre-centrifugation delays at room temperature. The two cytokines that showed the largest changes were further validated for their “diagnostic performance” in identifying serum or plasma samples with extended pre-centrifugation times.Results: In this study, using R&D Systems ELISA kits, EDTA plasma samples and serum samples with a pre-centrifugation delay longer than 24 h had an IL16 concentration higher than 313 pg/mL, and an IL8 concentration higher than 125 pg/mL, respectively. EDTA plasma samples with a pre-centrifugation delay longer than 48 h had an IL16 concentration higher than 897 pg/mL, citrate plasma samples had an IL8 concentration higher than 21.5 pg/mL and serum samples had an IL8 concentration higher than 528 pg/mL.Conclusions: These robust and accurate tools, based on simple and commercially available ELISA assays can greatly facilitate qualification of serum and plasma legacy collections with undocumented pre-analytics.

The analytical and clinical validity of analyses of RNA samples destined for clinical diagnosis and therapeutic management is directly impacted by RNA quality. RNA is affected by heat, enzymatic degradation, and Ultraviolet (UV) light. RNA from three eukaryotic cell lines was degraded by heat, RNase, or UV light. RNA integrity values obtained with the benchmark Agilent Bioanalyzer 2100 system were compared with those from the more recent QIAxcel Advanced system. The application of this novel method has allowed us to unravel differences between RNA biophysical and biochemical degradation modes. Agilent RNA integrity number (RIN) and QIAxcel RIS were comparable in heat-degraded and RNase III-degraded RNA. Agilent RIN and QIAxcel RIS were comparable at a RIN decision level of 7 in UV-degraded RNA but not overall. The QIAxcel RIS method was more precise than Agilent RIN for RIN<8, while the inverse was true for RIN≥8. Greater degradation of mRNA and rRNA in UV-damaged samples hampered the Agilent RIN calculation algorithm. Overall, RIS was more robust than RIN for assessing RNA integrity. The ΔΔCt-values for heat- and UV-degraded RNA samples showed slightly higher correlation with RIS than with RIN. RNA integrity can be used to categorize RNA samples for suitability for downstream gene expression analyses, independently of the RNA degradation mechanism. The new method QIAxcel is more robust and therefore allows more accurate categorization of compromised RNA samples.

The impact of shipping temperatures and preservation media used during transport of either peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) or Jurkat cells was assessed, in view of implementing of a proficiency testing scheme on mononuclear cell viability. Samples were analyzed before and after shipment at different temperatures (ambient temperature, dry ice, and liquid nitrogen) and in different preservation media (serum with cryoprotectant, commercial cryopreservation solution, and room temperature transport medium). Sample quality was assessed by viability assays (Trypan Blue dye exclusion, flow cytometry, Cell Analysis System cell counting (CASY)), and by ELISpot functional assay. The liquid nitrogen storage and shipment were found to be the most stable conditions to preserve cell viability and functionality. However, we show that alternative high quality shipment conditions for viable cells are dry ice shipment and commercial cryopreservation solution. These were also cost-efficient shipment conditions, satisfying the requirements of a proficiency testing scheme for viable mononuclear cells. Room temperature transport medium dramatically and adversely affected the integrity of mononuclear cells.