Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Consensus review of the clinical utility of DNA cytometry in carcinoma of the breast

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

Summary

This is the consensus statement regarding the clinical utility of DNA cytometry in breast cancer from the DNA Cytometry Consensus Conference held in Prout's Neck, Maine, USA, on October 1–4, 1992. Guidelines for clinical DNA cytometry generated at that meeting also appear in this issue of Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

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

Papers included in the consensus development process

  1. Auer G, Eriksson E, Azavedo E, Caspersson T, Wallgren A: Prognostic significance of nuclear DNA content in mammary adenocarcinomas in humans. Cancer Research 44:394–396, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baak JP, Chin D, van Diest PJ, Ortiz R, Matze-Cok P, Bacus SS: Comparative long-term prognostic value of quantitative HER-2/neu protein expression, DNA ploidy, and morphometric and clinical features in paraffin-embedded invasive breast cancer. Laboratory Investigation 64:215–223, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baildam AD, Zaloudik J, Howell A, Barnes DM, Turnbull L, Moore M, Sellwood RA: DNA analysis by flow cytometry, response to endocrine treatment and prognosis in advanced carcinoma of the breast. Brit J Cancer 55:553–560, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  4. 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 

  5. Beerman H, Bonsing BA, van de Vijver MJ, Hermans J, Kluin PM, Caspers RJ, van de Velde CJ, Cornelisse CJ: DNA ploidy of primary breast cancer and local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy. Brit J Cancer 64:139–143, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  6. Beerman H, Kluin M, Hermans J, van de Velde CJH, Cornelisse CJ: Prognostic significance of DNA-ploidy in a series of 690 primary breast cancer patients. Int J Cancer 45:34–39, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  7. Blanco G, Holli K, Heikkinen M, Kallioniemi OP, Taskinen P: Prognostic factors in recurrent breast cancer: relationships to site of recurrence, disease-free interval, female sex steroid receptors, ploidy and histological grading. Brit J Cancer 62:142–146, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  8. Clark GM, Mathieu MC, Owens MA, Dressler LG, Eudey L, Tormey DC, Osborne CK, Gilchrist KW, Mansour EG, Abeloff MD, et al: Prognostic significance of S-phase fraction in good-risk, node-negative breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 10:428–432, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  9. Clark GM, Dressler LG, Owens MA, Pounds G, Oldaker T, McGuire WL: Prediction of relapse or survival in patients with node-negative breast cancer by DNA flow cytometry. N Engl J Med 320:627–633, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cornelisse CJ, van de Velde CJ, Caspers RJ, Moolenaar AJ, Hermans J: DNA ploidy and survival in breast cancer patients. Cytometry 1987;8:225–234.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Coulson PB, Thornthwaite JT, Woolley TW, Sugarbaker EV, Seckinger D: Prognostic indicators including DNA histogram type, receptor content, and staging related to human breast cancer patient survival. Cancer Res 44:4187–4196, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dowle CS, Owainati A, Robins A, Burns K, Ellis IO, Elston CW, Blamey RW: Prognostic significance of the DNA content of human breast cancer. Br J Surg 74:133–136, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  13. Eskelinen M, Lipponen P, Papinaho S, Aaltomaa S, Kosma V-M, Klemi P, Syrjanen K: DNA flow cytometry, nuclear morphometry, mitotic indices and steroid receptors as independent prognostic factors in female breast cancer. Int J Cancer 51:555–561, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fallenius AG, Auer GU, Carstensen JM: Prognostic significance of DNA measurements in 409 consecutive breast cancer patients. Cancer 62:331–341, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fallenius AG, Franzen S, Auer GU: Predictive value of nuclear DNA content in breast cancer in relation to clinical and morphologic factors. Cancer 62:521–530, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ferno M, Baldetorp B, Borg A, Olsson H, Sigurdsson H, Killander D: Flow cytometric DNA index and S-phase fraction in breast cancer in relation to other prognostic variables and to clinical outcome. Acta Oncologica 31:157–165, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ferno M, Baldetorp B, Ewers SB, Idvall I, Olsson H, Sigurdsson H, Killander D: One or multiple samplings for flow cytometric DNA analyses in breast cancer — prognostic implications? Cytometry 13:241–249, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fisher B, Gunduz N, Costantino J, Fisher ER, Redmond C, Mamounas EP, Siderits R: DNA flow cytometric analysis of primary operable breast cancer. Relation of ploidy and S-phase fraction to outcome of patients in NSABP B-04. Cancer 68:1465–1475, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gnant MFX, Blijham GH, Reiner A, Reiner G, Reynders M, Schutte B, van Asche C, Steger G, Jakesz R: DNA ploidy and other results of DNA flow cytometry as prognostic factors in operable breast cancer: 10 year results of a randomised study. Eur J Cancer 28:711–716, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  20. Haag D, Feichter G, Goerttler K, Kaufmann M: Influence of systematic errors on the evaluation of the S phase portions from DNA distributions of solid tumors as shown for 328 breast carcinomas. Cytometry 8:377–385, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hedley DW, Rugg CA, Gelber RD: Association of DNA index and S-phase fraction with prognosis of nodes positive early breast cancer. Cancer Res 47: 4729–4735, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  22. Isola J, Visakorpi T, Holli K, Kallioniemi OP: Association of overexpression of tumor suppressor protein p53 with rapid cell proliferation and poor prognosis in node-negative breast cancer patients. JNCI 84:1109–1114, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kallioniemi OP, 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 

  24. Kallioniemi OP, 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 

  25. Kallioniemi OP, Blanco G, Alavaikko M, Hietanen T, Mattila J, Lauslahti K, Lehtinen M, Koivula T: Improving the prognostic value of DNA flow cytometry in breast cancer by combining DNA index and S-phase fraction: a proposed classification of DNA histograms in breast cancer. Cancer 62:2183–2190, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kallioniemi OP, Hietanen T, Mattila J, Lehtinen M, Lauslahti K, Koivula T: Aneuploid DNA content and high S-phase fraction of tumour cells are related to poor prognosis in patients with primary breast cancer. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 23:277–282, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  27. Klintenberg C, Stal O, Nordenskjold B, Wallgren A, Arvidsson S, Skoog L: Proliferative index, cytosol estrogen receptor and axillary node status as prognostic predictors in human mammary carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat 7 (Suppl):99–106, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kute TE, Muss HB, Cooper MR, Case LD, Buss D, Stanley V, Gregory B, Galleshaw J, Booher K: The use of flow cytometry for the prognosis of stage II adjuvant treated breast cancer patients. Cancer 66:1810–1816, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kute TE, Gregory B, Galleshaw J, Hopkins M, Buss D, Case D: How reproducible are flow cytometry data from paraffin-embedded blocks? Cytometry 9:494–498, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  30. Muss HB, Kute TE, Case LD, Smith LR, Booher C, Long R, Kammire L, Gregory B, Brockschmidt JK: The relation of flow cytometry to clinical and biologic characteristics in women with node negative primary breast cancer. Cancer 64:1894–1900, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  31. Noguchi M, Taniya T, Ohta N, Koyasaki N, Miyazaki I, Mizukami Y: Lymph node metastases versus DNA ploidy as prognostic factors for invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat 19:23–31, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  32. O'Reilly SM, Camplejohn RS, Barnes DM, Millis RR, Rubens RD, Richards MA: Node-negative breast cancer: prognostic subgroups defined by tumor size and flow cytometry [see comments]. J Clin Oncol 8:2040–2046, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  33. O'Reilly SM, Camplejohn RS, Barnes DM, Millis RR, Allen D, Rubens RD, Richards MA: DNA index, S-phase fraction, histological grade and prognosis in breast cancer. Br J Cancer 61:671–674, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  34. O'Reilly SM, Camplejohn RS, Millis RR, Rubens RD, Richards MA: Proliferative activity, histological grade and benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in node positive breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 26:1035–1038, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  35. Shankey TV, Rabinovitch PS, Bagwell B, Bauer KD, Cox C, Duque RE, Hedley DW, Mayall BH, Wheeless L: Guidelines for the implementation of clinical DNA cytometry. Breast Cancer Res Treat 28:51–53, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sharma S, Mishra MC, Kapur BM, Verma K, Nath I: The prognostic significance of ploidy analysis in operable breast cancer. Cancer 68:2612–2616, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  37. Sigurdsson H, Baldetorp B, Borg A, Dalberg M, Ferno M, Killander D, Olsson H: Indicators of prognosis in node-negative breast cancer [see comments]. N Engl J Med 322:1045–1053, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  38. Sigurdsson H, Baldetorp B, Borg A, Dalberg M, Ferno M, Killander D, Olsson H, Ranstam J: Flow cytometry in primary breast cancer: improving the prognostic value of the fraction of cells in the S-phase by optimal categorisation of cut-off levels. Brit J Cancer 62:786–790, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  39. Toikkanen S, Joensuu H, Klemi P: Nuclear DNA content as a prognostic factor in T1-2N0 breast cancer. Am J Clin Pathol 93:471–479, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  40. Toikkanen S, Joensuu H, Klemi P: The prognostic significance of nuclear DNA content in invasive breast cancer — a study with long-term follow-up. Br J Cancer 60:693–700, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  41. van der Linden JC, Lindeman J, Baak JP, Meijer CJ, Herman CJ: The Multivariate Prognostic Index and nuclear DNA content are independent prognostic factors in primary breast cancer patients. Cytometry 10:56–6, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  42. Winchester DJ, Duda RB, August CZ, Goldschmidt RA, Wruck DM, Rademaker AW, Winchester DP, Merkel DE: The importance of DNA flow cytometry in nodenegative breast cancer. Arch Surg 125:886–889, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  43. Witzig TE, Gonchoroff NJ, Therneau T, Gilbertson DT, Wold LE, Grant C, Grande J, Katzmann JA, Ahmann DL, Ingle JN: DNA content flow cytometry as a prognostic factor for node-positive breast cancer. The role of multiparameter ploidy analysis and specimen sonication. Cancer 68:1781–1788, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  44. Peters WP, Shpall EJ, Jones RB, Olsen GA, Bast RC, Gockerman JP, Moore JO: High-dose combination alkylating agents with bone marrow support as initial treatment for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 6: 1368–1376, 1988

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Medicine and Pathology, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    David W. Hedley

  2. Division of Medical Oncology, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, Texas, USA

    Gary M. Clark

  3. Department of Pathology, University of Leiden, The Netherlands

    Cees J. Cornelisse

  4. Department of Oncology, University of Lund, Sweden

    Dick Killander

  5. Department of Pathology, Bowman Gray School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA

    Timothy Kute

  6. Department of Medical Oncology, The Evanston Hospital, Evanston, Illinois, USA

    Douglas Merkel

Authors
  1. David W. Hedley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gary M. Clark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cees J. Cornelisse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dick Killander
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Timothy Kute
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Douglas Merkel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

First published in Cytometry 14:482–485, 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

Hedley, D.W., Clark, G.M., Cornelisse, C.J. et al. Consensus review of the clinical utility of DNA cytometry in carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Tr 28, 55–59 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00666357

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00666357

Key words

Search

Navigation