Background: Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) is a technology that has higher sensitivity than real-time PCR for the identification of trace DNA. However, the use of ddPCR for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis DNA in pathological samples has not been fully studied. Methods: A total of 65 formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE) specimens were included in this study. Twenty samples with definite results for tuberculosis (TB) were used to establish the ddPCR system for TB detection. ddPCR was then conducted to detect TB DNA in the 45 patients who were classified as 'possible TB' (real-time PCR results in the gray area, Ziehl-Neelsen staining-negative, and hematoxylin and eosin staining showing morphology suspicious for TB). The clinical treatment and disease outcomes were followed to assess the accuracy of ddPCR in the detection of TB DNA. Results: Among the 45 possible TB samples, 26 were ddPCR-positive, 12 were ddPCR-negative, and seven were in the gray area. ddPCR improved the positive rate of 57.8% (26/45) for the samples that were in the gray area by real-time PCR. Moreover, several patients received anti-TB therapy, and the effective ratio of therapy for the ddPCR-positive, ddPCR-negative, and ddPCR-gray area cases was 61.9% (13/21), 50.0% (2/4), and 33.3% (1/3), respectively. Conclusions: ddPCR is more sensitive for detecting mild TB via FFPE samples than real-time PCR. The ddPCR method is of additional value in the diagnosis of TB from pathological samples.

No abstract

BackgroundEpidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is an important marker for targeted therapy in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The samples obtained with minimally invasive biopsy techniques are usually small, and this limits their application in tissue subtyping or molecular profiling. The supernatants obtained after centrifugation of fine‐needle aspiration (FNA) samples are typically discarded. However, these fractions might contain cell‐free DNA that could be tested for EGFR mutations by genotyping methods that are normally used for plasma analysis.MethodsIn this study, 214 patients with known or suspected NSCLC who underwent FNA were enrolled. The workflow of the supernatants before molecular detection was as follows. The discarded FNA samples (15 mL) were stored in CytoLyt, a cleaning, fixation solution, and 10 mL of each sample was placed in a preservation solution for separation by low‐speed centrifugation. The primary supernatants (8 mL) were then separated by high‐speed centrifugation to obtain secondary supernatants. DNA was extracted from the supernatants with QIAamp circulating nucleic acid kits (Qiagen) and circulating DNA kits (AmoyDx), and EGFR mutations were assessed with Super‐ARMS EGFR detection kits (AmoyDx). The DNA was then extracted from corresponding cell pellets with tissue DNA kits (AmoyDx), and the EGFR status was analyzed with the amplification refractory mutation system and next‐generation sequencing methods.ResultsAll 214 samples yielded an adequate amount of cell‐free DNA for EGFR detection. The use of different DNA commercial extraction kits and the DNA contents of tumor cells did not affect the yield of DNA from the supernatants. The external controlled cycle threshold value of the EGFR test was affected by the concentration of the DNA in the supernatants (P < .05). However, the difference in the concentrations of the DNA in the supernatants did not affect the EGFR mutation status. The EGFR‐positive rate was 57.5% (123 of 214) in both the supernatants and the pellets from the 214 FNA samples. The concordance between EGFR variants in the supernatants and the corresponding pellets was 97.2%. EGFR mutations were also detected in 3 pellets but not in their corresponding supernatants and in 3 supernatants but not in their corresponding pellets. The supernatants of FNA biopsy samples might represent a new source for gaining information regarding the molecular characteristics of patients for targeted therapy.ConclusionsDiscarded supernatants provided an adequate amount of cell‐free DNA for EGFR detection, and this means that the pellets can be reserved for additional morphological and molecular analyses or to avoid repeat biopsies. Analyzing the EGFR status in cell supernatants and pellets might improve detection sensitivity and confer benefits to patients.