Comparison Between Flow Cytometric and Cytogenetic Tumor Cell DNA Content Using a Simple Flow Sample Preparation Method: Ploidy Comparison of 86 Fresh Pediatric Tumors

References

• Schultz D S, Zarbo R J. Comparison of eight modifications of Hedley's method for flow cytometric DNA ploidy analysis of paraffin-embedded tissue. Am J Clin Pathol 1992; 98: 291–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bach B A, Knape W A, Edinger M G, Tubbs R R. Improved sensitivity and resolution in the flow cytometric DNA analysis of human solid tumor specimens. Am J Clin Pathol 1991; 96: 615–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar D, Shimareet K, Lyon D. Comparison of flow cytometric DNA content analysis of fresh and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded solid neoplasms. Mod Pathol 1994; 7: 354–60
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Camplejohn R S, Macartney J C, Morris R W. Measurements of S-phase fractions in lymphoid tissues comparing fresh versus paraffin-embedded tissue and 4′,6′-diamidino-2phenylindole dihydrochloride versus propidium iodide. Cytometry 1989; 10: 410–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wersto R P, Liblit R L, Koss L G. Flow cytometric DNA analysis of human solid tumors: A review of the interpretation of DNA histograms. Hum Pathol 1991; 22: 1085–98
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elsheikh T M, Silverman J F, McCool J W, Riley R S. Comparative DNA analysis of solid tumors by flow cytometric and image analyses of touch imprints and flow cell suspensions. Am J Clin Pathol 1992; 98: 296–304
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Robinson R A. Defining the limits of DNA cytometry. Am J Clin Pathol 1992; 98: 275–7, Editorial.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Frierson H F. The need for improvement in flow cytometric analysis of ploidy and S-phase fraction. Am J Clin Pathol 1991; 95: 439–41, Editorial.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Peterson S E, Friedrick U. A comparison between flow cytometric ploidy investigation and chromosome analysis of 32 human colorectal tumors. Cytometry 1986; 7: 307–12
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bunn Pa, Whang-Peng J, Carney D N, et al. DNA content analysis by flow cytometry and cytogenetic analysis in mycoses fungoides and Sézary syndrome. J Clin Invest 1980; 65: 1440–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Barlogie B, Hittelman W, Spitzer G, et al. Correlation of DNA distribution abnormalities with cytogenetic findings in human adult leukemia and lymphoma. Cancer Res 1977; 37: 4400–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Look T A, Melvin S L, Williams D L, et al. Aneuploidy and percentage of S-phase cells determined by flow cytometry correlate with cell phenotype in childhood acute leukemia. Blood 1982; 60: 959–67
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang-Wuu S, Jacobs C, Soukup S, Gates R. Comparison of chromosome analysis to DNA content by flow cytometry for pediatric tumors. Pediatr Pathol 1990; 10: 671–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vindelov L L, Christensen I J, Jensen G, et al. Limits of detection of nuclear DNA abnormalities by flow cytometric DNA analysis. Cytometry 1983; 3: 332–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yunis J J. New chromosome techniques in the study of human neoplasia. Hum Pathol 1986; 12: 540–3
   Google Scholar
• Mullen P, Miller W R. Variations associated with the DNA analysis of multiple fine needle aspirates obtained from breast cancer patients. Br J Cancer 1989; 59: 688–91
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jacobsen A B, Fossa S D, Thorud E, et al. DNA flow cytometric values in bladder carcinoma biopsies obtained from fresh and paraffin-embedded material. APMIS 1988; 96: 25–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wingren S, Hatschek T, Stal O, Boeryd B, Nordenskjold B. Comparison of static and flow cytometry for estimation of DNA index and S-phase fraction in fresh and paraffin-embedded breast cancer tissue. Acta Oncol 1988; 6: 793–7
   Google Scholar
• Schutte B, Reynders MM J, Bosman F T, Blijham G H. Flow cytometric determination of DNA ploidy level in nuclei isolated from paraffin-embedded tissue. Cytometry 1985; 6: 26–30
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Klemi P, Joensuu H. Comparison of DNA ploidy in routine fine needle aspiration biopsy samples and paraffin-embedded tissue samples. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 1988; 10: 195–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shankey T V, Rabinivitch P S, Bagwell B, et al. Guidelines for implementation of clinical DNA cytometry. Cytometry 1993; 14: 472–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cusick E L, Milton J I, Ewen SW B. The resolution of aneuploid DNA stemlines by flow cytometry: Limitations imposed by the coefficient of variation and the percentage of aneuploid nuclei. Anal Cell Pathol 1990; 2: 139–48
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schmidt D, Wiedemann B, Kiel W, et al. Flow cytometric analysis of nephroblastomas and related neoplasms. Cancer 1986; 58: 2494–500
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varsa E, McConnell T, Dressler L, Ducan M. Atypical congenital mesoblastic nephroma. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1989; 113: 1078–80
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hiddemann W, Wormann B, Godhe W, Buchner T. DNA aneuploidies in adult patients with acute myelogenous leukemia. Cancer 1986; 57: 2146–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeBeau M M. Detecting genetic changes in human tumor cells: Have scientists “gone fishing”?. Blood 1993; 81: 1979–83, Editorial.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Persons D L, Takai K, Gibney D J, Katzmann J A, Lieber M M, Jenkins R B. Comparison of fluorescence in situ hybridization with flow cytometry and static image analysis in ploidy analysis of paraffin-embedded prostate adenocarcinoma. Hum Pathol 1994; 25: 678–83
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Barlogie B, Raber M N, Schumann J, et al. Flow cytometry in clinical cancer research. Cancer Res 1983; 43: 3982–97
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar