Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Guidelines for the implementation of clinical DNA cytometry

  • DNA Cytometry Consensus Conference
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

These consensual guidelines and recommendations address the potential utility of DNA cytometry in characterizing human malignancies. They are provided to inform laboratory personnel, pathologists, and clinicians about DNA cytometry. For individual patients, use of DNA cytometry, selection of specific techniques, and interpretation and utilization of results remain the responsibility of the attending physicians.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Hiddemann W, Schumann J, Andreff M, Barlogie B, Herman CJ, Leif RC, Mayall BH, Murphy RF, Sandberg AA: Convention on nomenclature for DNA cytometry. Cytometry 5:445–446, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kallioniemi O-P, Joensuu H, Klemi P, Koivula T: Inter-laboratory comparison of DNA flow cytometric results from paraffin-embedded breast carcinomas. Breast Cancer Res Treat 17:59–61, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wheeless LL, Coon JS, Cox C, Deitch AD, deVere White RW, Fradet Y, Koss LG, Melamed MR, O'Connell MJ, Reeder JE, Weinstein RS, Wersto RP: Precision of DNA flow cytometry in inter-institutional analyses. Cytometry 12:405–412, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hitchcock CL: Variability in flow cytometric results using identical archival samples. Cytometry (Suppl) 5:46, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Shankey TV, Badalament R, Benson M, Carroll P, deVere White R, Duque R, Herman CJ: An inter-laboratory assessment of the reproducibility of flow cytometric DNA content analysis of archival tumor samples. Cytometry (Suppl) 5:56, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Joensuu H, Kallioniemi O-P: Different opinions on classification of DNA histograms produced from paraffin-embedded tissue. Cytometry 10:711–717, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Rabinovitch PS: Practical considerations for DNA content and cell cycle analysis.In Bauer KD, Duque RE, Shankey TV (eds) Clinical Flow Cytometry: Principles and Application. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore MD, 1993, p 117.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kallioniemi OP: Comparison of fresh and paraffinembedded tissue as starting material for DNA flow cytometry and evaluation of intratumor heterogeneity. Cytometry 9:164–169, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Alanen KA, Klemi PJ, Joensuu H, Kujari H, Pekkala E: Comparison of fresh, ethanol-preserved, and paraffinembedded samples in DNA flow cytometry. Cytometry 10:81–85, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Heiden T, Strang P, Stendahl U, Tribukait B: The reproducibility of flow cytometric analyses in human tumors. Methodological aspects. Anticancer Res 10:49–54, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  11. De Vita R, Calugi A, Eleuteri P, Maggi O, Nassuato C, Vecchione A: Flow cytometric nuclear DNA content of fresh and paraffin-embedded tissues of breast carcinomas and fibroadenomas. Eur J Basic Appl Histochem 35:233–244, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Alanen KA, Joensuu H, Klemi P: Autolysis is a potential source of false aneuploid peaks in flow cytometric DNA histograms. Cytometry 10:417–425, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ferno M, Langstrom-Einarsson E, Willen R, Baldetorp B, Killander D: Improved preparation technique of cervical carcinoma for flow cytometric DNA analysis with tissue disintegration in hydrochloric acid. In Vivo 4:225–229, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Joensuu H, Alanen KA, Klemi PJ, Aine R: Evidence for false aneuploid peaks in flow cytometric analysis of paraffin-embedded tissue. Cytometry 11:431–437, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Visscher DW, Zarbo RT, Jacobsen G, et al: Multiparameter deoxyribonucleic acid and cell cycle analysis of breast carcinomas by flow cytometry. Clinopathologic correlations. Lab Invest 62:370–378, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Beerman H, Smit VT, Kluin PM, Bonsing BA, Hermans J, Cornelisse CJ: Flow cytometric analysis of DNA stemline heterogeneity in primary and metastatic breast cancer. Cytometry 12:147–154, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fuhr JE, Frye A, Kattine AA, Van Meter S: Flow cytometric determination of breast tumor heterogeneity. Cancer 67:1401–1405, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Meyer JS, Wittliff JL: Regional heterogeneity in breast carcinoma: thymidine labelling index, steroid hormone receptors, DNA ploidy. Int J Cancer 47:213–220, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Askensten UG, von Rosen AK, Nilsson RS, Auer GU: Intratumoral variations in DNA distribution patterns in mammary adenocarcinomas. Cytometry 10:326–333, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Wersto RP, Liblit RL, Deitch D, Koss LG: Variability in DNA measurements in multiple tumor samples of human colonic carcinoma. Cancer 67:106–115, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Isobe H, Miyamoto H, Inoue K, Shimizu M, Endo T, Mizuno S, Kawakami Y: Flow cytometric DNA content analysis in primary lung cancer: comparison of results from fresh and paraffin-embedded specimens. J Surg Oncol 43:36–39, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Norming U, Nyman CR, Tribukait B: Comparative flow cytometric deoxyribonucleic acid studies on exophytic tumor and random mucosal biopsies in untreated carcinoma of the bladder. J Urol 142:1442–1447, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Greene DR, Taylor SR, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT: DNA ploidy by image analysis of individual foci of prostate cancer: a preliminary report. Cancer Res 51:4084–4089, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Slocum HK, Pavelic ZP, Kanter PM, Nowak HJ, Rustum YM: The soft agar clonogenicity and characterization of cells obtained from human solid tumors by mechanical and enzymatic means. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 6:219–225, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  25. McDivitt RW, Stone KR, Meyer JS: A method for dissociation of viable human breast cancer cells that produces flow cytometric kinetic information similar to that obtained by thymidine labeling. Cancer Res 44:2628–2633, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Chassevent A, Daver A, Bertrand G, Coic H, Geslin J, Bidabe M-C, George P, Larra F: Comparative flow DNA analysis of different cell suspensions in breast carcinoma. Cytometry 5:263–267, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Costa A, Silvestrini R, Del Bino G, Motta R: Implications of disaggregation procedures on biological representation of human solid tumors. Cell Tissue Kinet 20:171–180, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ensley JF, Maciorowski Z, Pietraszkiewicz H, Hassan M, Kish J, Al-Sarraf M, Jacobs J, Weaver A, Atkinson D, Crissman J: Solid tumor preparation for clinical application of flow cytometry. Cytometry 8:479–493, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Smeets AW, Pauwels RP, Beck HL, Feitz WF, Geraedts JP, Debruyne FM, Laarakkers L, Vooijs GP, Ramaekers FC: Comparison of tissue disaggregation techniques of transitional cell bladder carcinomas for flow cytometry and chromosomal analysis. Cytometry 8:14–19, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Wolley RC, Herz F, Koss LG: Caution on the use of lymphocytes as standards in the flow cytometric analysis of cultured cells. Cytometry 2:370–373, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Evenson D, Darzynkiewicz Z, Jost L, Ballachey B: Changes in accessibility of DNA to various fluorochromes during spermatogenesis. Cytometry 7:45–53, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Stokke T, Steen HB: Distinction of leukocyte classes based on chromatin-structure-dependent DNA-binding of 7-aminoactinomycin D. Cytometry 8:576–583, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Darzynkiewicz Z, Traganos F, Kapuscinski J, Staiano-Cuico L, Melamed MR: Accessibility of DNA in situ to various fluorochromes: relationship to chromatin changes during erythroid differentiation of Friend Leukemia cells. Cytometry 5:355–363, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Klein FA, White FKH: Flow cytometry deoxyribonucleic acid determinations and cytology of bladder washings: practical experience. J Urol 139:275–278, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Cusick EL, Milton JI, Ewen SWB: The resolution of aneuploid DNA stemlines by flow cytometry: limitations by the coefficient of variation and the percentage of aneuploid nuclei. Anal Cell Path 2:139–148, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Bagwell CB, Baker D, Whetstone S, Munson M, Hitchcox S, Ault KA, Lovett EJ: A simple and rapid method for determining the linearity of a flow cytometer amplification system. Cytometry 10:689–694, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kallioniemi O-P, Visakorpi T, Holli K, Heikkinen A, Isola J, Koivula T: Improved prognostic impact of S-phase values from paraffin-embedded breast and prostate carcinomas after correcting for nuclear slicing. Cytometry 12:413–421, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Winkler HZ, Rainwater LM, Myers RP, Farrow GM, Therneau TM, Zincke H, Lieber MM: Stage D1 prostatic adenocarcinoma: significance of nuclear DNA ploidy patterns studied by flow cytometry. Mayo Clin Proc 63:103–112, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Stege R, Lundh B, Tribukait B, Pousette Å, Carlström K, Hasenson M: Deoxyribonucleic acid ploidy and the direct assay of prostatic acid phosphatase and prostate specific antigen in fine needle aspiration biopsies as diagnostic methods in prostatic carcinoma. J Urol 144: 299–302, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Dean PN: Methods of data analysis in flow cytometry.In Van Dilla MA, Dean PN, Laerum OD, Melamed MR (eds) Flow Cytometry: Instrumentation and Data Analysis. Academic Press, London, 1985, p 202.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Depts. of Urology and Pathology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 South First Ave., 60153, Maywood, IL, USA

    T. Vincent Shankey

  2. Department of Pathology, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Peter S. Rabinovitch

  3. Verity Software House, Topsham, ME, USA

    Bruce Bagwell

  4. Department of Cell Biology, Genentech, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Kenneth D. Bauer

  5. Department of Biostatistics, Univ. of Rochester Med. Cntr., Rochester, NY, USA

    Christopher Cox

  6. Dept. of Pathology, Carraway Methodist Med. Cntr., Norwood Clinic, Birmingham, AL, USA

    Ricardo E. Duque

  7. Depts. of Medicine and Pathology, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Canada

    David W. Hedley

  8. Dept. of Laboratory Medicine, Univ. of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Brian H. Mayall

  9. Dept. of Pathology, University of Rochester Med. Cntr., Rochester, NY, USA

    Leon Wheeless

Authors
  1. T. Vincent Shankey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter S. Rabinovitch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bruce Bagwell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kenneth D. Bauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christopher Cox
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ricardo E. Duque
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. David W. Hedley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Brian H. Mayall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Leon Wheeless
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

First published in Cytometry 14:472–477, 1993, ©Wiley-Liss, a division of John Wiley and Sons, Inc., reprinted with permission.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shankey, T.V., Rabinovitch, P.S., Bagwell, B. et al. Guidelines for the implementation of clinical DNA cytometry. Breast Cancer Res Tr 28, 61–68 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00666358

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00666358

Key words

Search

Navigation