Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 498

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 69 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Size-selective collection of circulating tumor cells using Vortex technology

Sollier, Elodie, Go, Derek E., Che, James, Gossett, Daniel R., O'Byrne, Sean, Weaver, Westbrook M., Kummer, Nicolas, Rettig, Matthew, Goldman, Jonathan, Nickols, Nicholas, McCloskey, Susan, Kulkarni, Rajan P., Di Carlo, Dino·2014·Lab Chip

Abstract

A blood-based, low cost alternative to radiation intensive CT and PET imaging is critically needed for cancer prognosis and management of its treatment. "Liquid biopsies" of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from a relatively non-invasive blood draw are particularly ideal, as they can be repeated regularly to provide up to date molecular information about the cancer, which would also open up key opportunities for personalized therapies. Beyond solely diagnostic applications, CTCs are also a subject of interest for drug development and cancer research. In this paper, we adapt a technology previously introduced, combining the use of micro-scale vortices and inertial focusing, specifically for the high-purity extraction of CTCs from blood samples. First, we systematically varied parameters including channel dimensions and flow rates to arrive at an optimal device for maximum trapping efficiency and purity. Second, we validated the final device for capture of cancer cell lines in blood, considering several factors, including the effect of blood dilution, red blood cell lysis and cell deformability, while demonstrating cell viability and independence on EpCAM expression. Finally, as a proof-of-concept, CTCs were successfully extracted and enumerated from the blood of patients with breast (N = 4, 25-51 CTCs per 7.5 mL) and lung cancer (N = 8, 23-317 CTCs per 7.5 mL). Importantly, samples were highly pure with limited leukocyte contamination (purity 57-94%). This Vortex approach offers significant advantages over existing technologies, especially in terms of processing time (20 min for 7.5 mL of whole blood), sample concentration (collecting cells in a small volume down to 300 μL), applicability to various cancer types, cell integrity and purity. We anticipate that its simplicity will aid widespread adoption by clinicians and biologists who desire to not only enumerate CTCs, but also uncover new CTC biology, such as unique gene mutations, vesicle secretion and roles in metastatic processes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1039/c3lc50689d

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 69 references

Cited by

See all 498

Metadata

Authors
Sollier, E., Go, D. E., Che, J., Gossett, D. R., O'Byrne, S., Weaver, W. M., Kummer, N., Rettig, M., Goldman, J., Nickols, N., McCloskey, S., Kulkarni, R. P., & Di Carlo, D.
Venue
Lab Chip
Published
2014
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
63-77
ISSN
  • 1473-0189 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-0197
OpenAlex
W2159024004
Cited by
498
References
69
FWCI
20.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Size-selective collection of circulating tumor cells using Vortex technology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/c3lc50689d
The paper
Sollier, E., Go, D. E., Che, J., Gossett, D. R., O'Byrne, S., Weaver, W. M., Kummer, N., Rettig, M., Goldman, J., Nickols, N., McCloskey, S., Kulkarni, R. P., & Di Carlo, D. (2014). Size-selective collection of circulating tumor cells using Vortex technology. Lab Chip. https://doi.org/10.1039/c3lc50689d

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.