Table 2 Comparison between cell soring by immunomagnetic beads and Target FISH
From: Target fluorescence in-situ hybridization (Target FISH) for plasma cell enrichment in myeloma
Cell sorting by immunomagnetic beads | Target FISH | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Procedure | Time (hours) | Reagent Cost (USD) | Procedure | Time (hours) | Reagent Cost (USD) | ||
Day 1 | Plasma cell sorting by MACS whole blood CD138 μ-beads | 1.5 | 60 | Day 1 | Plasma cell enrichment by Ficoll | 1.5 | 12 |
Cytospin slides (10 slides per sample) | 0.5 | 29 | |||||
Cytospin slides (10 slides per sample) | 0.5 | 29 | MGG staining | 0.5 | 9 | ||
BioView scan and review | 2.0 | 0 | |||||
Day 2 | Lysis of red blood cells on slide | 0.5 | 2 | Day 2 | De-staining of MGG | 1.5 | 2 |
FISH hybridization | 3.0 | 236 | FISH hybridization | 3.0 | 236 | ||
Probe hybridization | Overnight | 0 | Probe hybridization | Overnight | 0 | ||
Day 3 | Post-hybridization | 1.0 | 13 | Day 3 | Post-hybridization | 1.0 | 13 |
Manual slide examination | 2.0 | 0 | BioView slide scan | 3–4 | 0 | ||
Review results, data analysis and reporting | 2.0 | 0 | Review results, data analysis and reporting | 2.0 | 0 | ||
Total | 10.5 | 340 | Total | 15–16 | 301 | ||