AIM: To investigate the role of DNA aneuploidy, particularly in patients with node negative breast cancer, in order to identify the different risk profiles within the pool of heterogeneous breast cancers. METHODS: Imprint smears from 370 breast carcinomas were Feulgen-stained and measured by DNA image analysis. DNA aneuploidy was graded by the amount of aneuploid cells (DNA content >5c) and highly aneuploid cells (DNA content >9c) in a breast tumour population. These results were correlated to the clinical long-term follow-up. A statistical cut-off value of >10 aneuploid cells (>5c) and of >1 highly aneuploid cell (>9c) was evaluated as significant for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Subgroups among patients with breast cancer with aneuploid cells below the cut-off value showed a significantly longer DFS and OS than those with aneuploid cells above this value. Patients with node negative breast cancer with >10 aneuploid cells (>5c) and >1 highly aneuploid cell (>9c) showed an unfavourable prognosis similar to patients with node positive breast cancer with <10 aneuploid cells (>5c) and <1 highly aneuploid tumour cell (>9c) in DFS and OS. CONCLUSION: Nuclear DNA content, as an objective marker of tumour aggressiveness, provides prognostic information in patients with both node negative and node positive breast cancer. Based on DNA aneuploidy, the clinically inhomogeneous group of patients with node negative breast cancer can be stratified into low-risk and high-risk subgroups. Therefore, DNA ploidy analysis may identify high-risk patients with lymph node negative breast cancer who might benefit from additional adjuvant therapy.
AIM: To investigate the role of DNA aneuploidy, particularly in patients with node negative breast cancer, in order to identify the different risk profiles within the pool of heterogeneous breast cancers. METHODS: Imprint smears from 370 breast carcinomas were Feulgen-stained and measured by DNA image analysis. DNA aneuploidy was graded by the amount of aneuploid cells (DNA content >5c) and highly aneuploid cells (DNA content >9c) in a breast tumour population. These results were correlated to the clinical long-term follow-up. A statistical cut-off value of >10 aneuploid cells (>5c) and of >1 highly aneuploid cell (>9c) was evaluated as significant for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Subgroups among patients with breast cancer with aneuploid cells below the cut-off value showed a significantly longer DFS and OS than those with aneuploid cells above this value. Patients with node negative breast cancer with >10 aneuploid cells (>5c) and >1 highly aneuploid cell (>9c) showed an unfavourable prognosis similar to patients with node positive breast cancer with <10 aneuploid cells (>5c) and <1 highly aneuploid tumour cell (>9c) in DFS and OS. CONCLUSION: Nuclear DNA content, as an objective marker of tumour aggressiveness, provides prognostic information in patients with both node negative and node positive breast cancer. Based on DNA aneuploidy, the clinically inhomogeneous group of patients with node negative breast cancer can be stratified into low-risk and high-risk subgroups. Therefore, DNA ploidy analysis may identify high-risk patients with lymph node negative breast cancer who might benefit from additional adjuvant therapy.
Authors: Huseyin Seker; Michael O Odetayo; Dobrila Petrovic; Raouf N G Naguib; C Bartoli; L Alasio; M S Lakshmi; G V Sherbet Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2002 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.480
Authors: S Eva Singletary; Craig Allred; Pandora Ashley; Lawrence W Bassett; Donald Berry; Kirby I Bland; Patrick I Borgen; Gary Clark; Stephen B Edge; Daniel F Hayes; Lorie L Hughes; Robert V P Hutter; Monica Morrow; David L Page; Abram Recht; Richard L Theriault; Ann Thor; Donald L Weaver; H Samuel Wieand; Frederick L Greene Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-09-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ulrike Kronenwett; Sören Huwendiek; Carin Ostring; Neil Portwood; Uwe J Roblick; Yudi Pawitan; Ayodele Alaiya; Roland Sennerstam; Anders Zetterberg; Gert Auer Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2004-02-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: G Haroske; J P Baak; H Danielsen; F Giroud; A Gschwendtner; M Oberholzer; A Reith; P Spieler; A Böcking Journal: Anal Cell Pathol Date: 2001 Impact factor: 2.916
Authors: Harald Blegen; John S Will; B Michael Ghadimi; Hesed-Padilla Nash; Anders Zetterberg; Gert Auer; Thomas Ried Journal: Anal Cell Pathol Date: 2003 Impact factor: 2.916
Authors: Yun Du; Xiao Guo; Rui Wang; Yang Ma; Yan Zhang; Ying Liu; Lvli Dong; Juan Wu; Xiaokun Ji; Heng Wang Journal: J Cancer Date: 2020-02-06 Impact factor: 4.207
Authors: Christoph Dumke; Timo Gemoll; Martina Oberländer; Sandra Freitag-Wolf; Christoph Thorns; Axel Glaessgen; Rinse Klooster; Silvère M van der Maarel; Jerker Widengren; Christian Doehn; Gert Auer; Jens K Habermann Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-12-27 Impact factor: 4.379