Laser scanning cytometry: principles and applications-an update.

Laser scanning cytometer (LSC) is the microscope-based cytofluorometer that offers a plethora of unique analytical capabilities, not provided by flow cytometry (FCM). This review describes attributes of LSC and covers its numerous applications derived from plentitude of the parameters that can be measured. Among many LSC applications the following are emphasized: (a) assessment of chromatin condensation to identify mitotic, apoptotic cells, or senescent cells; (b) detection of nuclear or mitochondrial translocation of critical factors such as NF-κB, p53, or Bax; (c) semi-automatic scoring of micronuclei in mutagenicity assays; (d) analysis of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and use of the FISH analysis attribute to measure other punctuate fluorescence patterns such as γH2AX foci or receptor clustering; (e) enumeration and morphometry of nucleoli and other cell organelles; (f) analysis of progeny of individual cells in clonogenicity assay; (g) cell immunophenotyping; (h) imaging, visual examination, or sequential analysis using different probes of the same cells upon their relocation; (i) in situ enzyme kinetics, drug uptake, and other time-resolved processes; (j) analysis of tissue section architecture using fluorescent and chromogenic probes; (k) application for hypocellular samples (needle aspirate, spinal fluid, etc.); and (l) other clinical applications. Advantages and limitations of LSC are discussed and compared with FCM.

Laser scanning cytometry and its applications: a pioneering technology in the field of quantitative imaging cytometry.

Imaging cytometry plays an increasingly important role in all fields of biological and medical sciences. It has evolved into a complex and powerful discipline amalgamating image acquisition technologies and quantitative digital image analysis. This chapter presents an overview of the complex and ever-developing landscape of imaging cytometry, highlighting the imaging and quantitative performance of a wide range of available instruments based on their methods of sample illumination and the detection technologies they employ. Each of these technologies has inherent advantages and shortcomings stemming from its design. It is therefore paramount to assess the appropriateness of all of the imaging cytometry options available to determine the optimal choice for specific types of studies. Laser scanning cytometry (LSC), the original imaging cytometry technology, is an attractive choice for analysis of both cellular and tissue specimens. Quantitative performance, flexibility, and the benefits of preserving native sample architecture and avoiding the introduction of artificial signals, particularly in cell-signaling studies and multicolor tissue analysis, are speeding the adoption of LSC and opening up new possibilities for developing sophisticated applications.

Automation of the buccal micronucleus cytome assay using laser scanning cytometry.

Laser scanning cytometry (LSC) can be used to quantify the fluorescence intensity or laser light loss (absorbance) of localized molecular targets within nuclear and cytoplasmic structures of cells while maintaining the morphological features of the examined tissue. It was aimed to develop an automated LSC protocol to study cellular and nuclear anomalies and DNA damage events in human buccal mucosal cells. Since the buccal micronucleus cytome assay has been used to measure biomarkers of DNA damage (micronuclei and/or nuclear buds), cytokinesis defects (binucleated cells), proliferative potential (basal cell frequency), and/or cell death (condensed chromatin, karyorrhexis, and pyknotic and karyolytic cells), the following automated LSC protocol describes scoring criteria for these same parameters using an automated imaging LSC. In this automated LSC assay, cells derived from the buccal mucosa were harvested from the inside of patient's mouths using a small-headed toothbrush. The cells were washed to remove any debris and/or bacteria, and a single-cell suspension prepared and applied to a microscope slide using a cytocentrifuge. Cells were fixed and stained with Feulgen and Light Green stain allowing both chromatic and fluorescent analysis to be undertaken simultaneously with the use of an LSC.

Laser scanning cytometry for automation of the micronucleus assay.

Laser scanning cytometry (LSC) provides a novel approach for automated scoring of micronuclei (MN) in different types of mammalian cells, serving as a biomarker of genotoxicity and mutagenicity. In this review, we discuss the advances to date in measuring MN in cell lines, buccal cells and erythrocytes, describe the advantages and outline potential challenges of this distinctive approach of analysis of nuclear anomalies. The use of multiple laser wavelengths in LSC and the high dynamic range of fluorescence and absorption detection allow simultaneous measurement of multiple cellular and nuclear features such as cytoplasmic area, nuclear area, DNA content and density of nuclei and MN, protein content and density of cytoplasm as well as other features using molecular probes. This high-content analysis approach allows the cells of interest to be identified (e.g. binucleated cells in cytokinesis-blocked cultures) and MN scored specifically in them. MN assays in cell lines (e.g. the CHO cell MN assay) using LSC are increasingly used in routine toxicology screening. More high-content MN assays and the expansion of MN analysis by LSC to other models (i.e. exfoliated cells, dermal cell models, etc.) hold great promise for robust and exciting developments in MN assay automation as a high-content high-throughput analysis procedure.

Laser scanning cytometry: principles and applications.

The laser scanning cytometer (LSC) is the microscope-based cytofluorometer that offers a plethora of analytical capabilities. Multilaser-excited fluorescence emitted from individual cells is measured at several wavelength ranges, rapidly (up to 5000 cells/min), with high sensitivity and accuracy. The following applications of LSC are reviewed: (1) identification of cells that differ in degree of chromatin condensation (e.g., mitotic or apoptotic cells or lymphocytes vs granulocytes vs monocytes); (2) detection of translocation between cytoplasm vs nucleus or nucleoplasm vs nucleolus of regulatory molecules such as NF-kappaB, p53, or Bax; (3) semiautomatic scoring of micronuclei in mutagenicity assays; (4) analysis of fluorescence in situ hybridization; (5) enumeration and morphometry of nucleoli; (6) analysis of phenotype of progeny of individual cells in clonogenicity assay; (7) cell immunophenotyping; (8) visual examination, imaging, or sequential analysis of the cells measured earlier upon their relocation, using different probes; (9) in situ enzyme kinetics and other time-resolved processes; (10) analysis of tissue section architecture; (11) application for hypocellular samples (needle aspirate, spinal fluid, etc.); (12) other clinical applications. Advantages and limitations of LSC are discussed and compared with flow cytometry.

Assessment of histone H2AX phosphorylation induced by DNA topoisomerase I and II inhibitors topotecan and mitoxantrone and by the DNA cross-linking agent cisplatin.

BACKGROUND: DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) in chromatin, whether induced by radiation, antitumor drugs, or by apoptosis-associated (AA) DNA fragmentation, provide a signal for histone H2AX phosphorylation on Ser-139; the phosphorylated H2AX is denoted gammaH2AX. The intensity of immunofluorescence (IF) of gammaH2AX was reported to reveal the frequency of DSBs in chromatin induced by radiation or by DNA topoisomerase I (topo 1) and II (topo 2) inhibitors. The purpose of this study was to further characterize the drug-induced (DI) IF of gammaH2AX, and in particular to distinguish it from AA gammaH2AX IF triggered by DNA breaks that occur in the course of AA DNA fragmentation. METHODS: HL-60 cells in cultures were treated with topotecan (TPT), mitoxantrone (MTX), or with DNA cross-linking drug cisplatin (CP); using multiparameter flow and laser-scanning cytometry, induction of gammaH2AX was correlated with: 1) caspase-3 activation; 2) chromatin condensation, 3) cell cycle phase, and 4) AA DNA fragmentation. The intensity of gammaH2AX IF was compensated for by an increase in histone/DNA content, which doubles during the cell cycle, and for the "programmed" H2AX phosphorylation, which occurs in untreated cells. RESULTS: In cells treated with TPT or MTX, the increase in DI-gammaH2AX IF peaked at 1.5 or 2 h, and was maximal in S- or G(1)-phase cells, respectively, for each drug. In cells treated with CP, compared with TPT, the gammaH2AX IF was less intense, peaked later (3 h) and showed no cell cycle-phase specificity. In the presence of phosphatase inhibitor calyculin A, a continuous increase in the TPT-induced gammaH2AX IF was still seen past 1.5 h, and after 3 h gammaH2AX IF was 2.7- to 3.4-fold higher than in the absence of the inhibitor. The AA gammaH2AX IF was distinguished from the DI-gammaH2AX IF by: 1) its greater intensity; 2) its prevention by caspase inhibitor zVAD-FMK; and 3) the concurrent activation of caspase-3 in the same cells. A decrease in AA gammaH2AX IF coinciding with AA chromatin condensation was seen in the late stages of apoptosis. CONCLUSIONS: Multiparameter analysis of gammaH2AX IF, caspase-3 activation, cellular DNA content, and chromatin condensation allowed us to distinguish the DI from AA H2AX phosphorylation and relate them to the cell cycle phase and stage of apoptosis. With a comparable degree of ds DNA breaks, the cells arrested at the G1 or G2/M checkpoint were less prone to undergo apoptosis than the cells replicating DNA. H2AX phosphorylation seen in CP-treated cells may be associated with DNA repair that involves nucleotide excision repair (NER) and nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ). When the primary drug-induced lesions do not involve ds DNA breaks, but ds DNA breaks are formed during DNA repair, as in the case of CP, analysis of H2AX phosphorylation may reflect extent of the repair process.