Methodological Aspects of Flow Cytometry DNA Analysis in Endometrial Carcinoma, with Special Reference to Sampling and Reproducibility

References

• Hedley B. W., Friedlander M. L., Taylor I. W., et al. Method for analysis of cellular DNA content of paraffin-embedded pathological material using flow cytometry. J Histochem Cytochem 1983; 31: 1333–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schutte B., Reynders M., Bosman F., Blijham G. Flow cytometric determination of ploidy level in nuclei isolated from paraffin-embedded tissue. Cytometry 1985; 6: 26–30
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Heiden T., Wang N., Tribukait B. An improved Hedley method for preparation of paraffin embedded tissues for flow cytometric analysis of ploidy and S-phase. Cytometry 1991; 12: 614–21
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Iversen O. E. Flow cytometric deoxyribonucleic acid index: A prognostic factor in endometrial carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986; 155: 770–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindahl B., Aim P., Fernö M, et al. Prognostic value of flow cytometric DNA measurements in stage I–II endometrial carcinoma: Correlation with steroid receptor concentration tumor myometrial invasion and degree of differentiation. Anticancer Res 1987; 7: 791–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geisinger K. R., Homesley H. O., Morgan T. M., Kute T. E., Marshal R. B. Endometrial adenocarcinoma. A multiparameter clinico-pathologic analyses including DNA profile and sex steroid hormone receptors. Cancer 1986; 58: 1518–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stendahl U., Strang P., Wagenius G., Bergstrom R., Tribukait B. Prognostic significance of proliferation in endometrial adenocarcinoma: A multivariate analysis of clinical and flow cytometric variables. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1991; 10: 271–84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minckwitz G., Kuhn W., Kaufmann M., et al. Prognostic importance of DNA-ploidy and S-phase fraction in endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1994; 4: 250–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Friberg L. G., Noren H., Delle U. Prognostic value of DNA ploidy and S-phase fraction in endometrial cancer stage I and II: a prospective 5-year survival study. Gynecol Oncol 1994; 53: 64–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Susini T., Rapi S., Savino L., Boddi V., Berti P., Massi G. Prognostic value of flow cytometric deoxyribonucleic acid index in endometrial carcinoma: comparison with other clinical-pathologic parameters. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 170: 527–34
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wagenius G., Bergstrom R., Strang P., et al. Prognostic significance of flowcytometric and clinical variables in endometrial adenocarcinoma stages I and II. Anticancer Res 1992; 12: 725–32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moberger B., Auer G., Forslund G., Moberger G. The prognostic significance of DNA measurements in endometrial carcinoma. Cytometry 1984; 5: 430–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sorbe B., Risberg B., Frankendahl B. DNA ploidy morphometry and nuclear grade as prognostic factors in endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1990; 38: 22–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg P., Wingren S., Simonsen E., Stal O., Risberg B., Nordenskjold B. Flow cytometric measurements of DNA index and S-phase on paraffin-embedded early stage endometrial cancer: An important prognostic indicator. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 35: 50–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Britton L. C., Wilson T. O., Gaffey T. A., Lieber M. C., Wicand H. S., Podratz K. Flow cytometric DNA-analysis of stage I endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 34: 317–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konski A. A., Myles J. L., Sawyer, et al. Flow cytometric DNA content analyses of paraffin block embedded endometrial carcinomas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1991; 21: 1033–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nowbury R., Schuerch C., Goodspeed N., Fanning J., Glidewell O., Evans M. DNA content as a prognostic factor in endometrial carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 76: 251–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goodman A., Bell D. A., Rice L. W. DNA ploidy status: its impact on early-stage endometrial adenocarcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1993; 51: 355–61
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Coleman R. L., Schink J. C., Miller D. S., et al. DNA flow cytometric analysis of clinical stage I endometrial carcinomas with lymph node metastases. Gynecol Oncol 1993; 50: 20–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fernö M, Baldetorp B., Ewers S. B., et al. One or multiple sampling for flow cytometric DNA analysis in breast cancer—Prognostic implications. Cytometry 1991; 13: 1–9
   Google Scholar
• Wingren S., Hatschek T., Stål O., Boeryd B., Nordenskjöld B. Comparison of static and flow cytofluorometry for estimation of DNA-index and S-phase fraction in fresh frozen and paraffin embedded breast carcinoma tissue. Acta Oncol 1988; 27: 793–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kallioniemi O. P. Comparison of fresh and paraffin embedded tissue as starting material for DNA flow cytometry and evaluation of intratumor heterogeneity. Cytometry 1988; 9: 164–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Risberg B., Stål O., Bjelkenkrantz K., et al. Use of formalin fixed paraffin embedded tumors for estimation of cellular DNA content and S-phase fraction by static cytofluorometry. Acta Radiol Oncol 1985; 24: 537–44
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kute T. E., Gregory B., Galleshow J., Hopkins M., Bass D., Case D. How reproducible are flow cytometry data from paraffin embedded blocks. Cytometry 1988; 9: 494–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ewers S., Attewell R., Baldetorp B., Borg A., Langstrom E., Killander D. Prognostic potential of flow cytometric S-phase and ploidy prospectively determined in primary breast carcinomas. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1991; 20: 93–100
   Google Scholar
• Baldetorp B., Dalberg M., Hoist U., Lindgren G. Statistical evaluation of cell kinetic data from DNA flow cytometry (FCM) by the EM algorithm. Cytometry 1989; 10: 695–705
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hiddemann W., Schumann J., Andreeff M., et al. Convention of nomenclature for DNA Cytometry 1984; 5: 445–6
   Google Scholar
• Baldetorp B., Bendahl P. O., Fernö M, et al. Reproducibility in DNA flow cytometric analysis of breast cancer: Comparison of 12 laboratories results for 67 sample homogenates. Comm Clin Cytometry 1995; 22: 115–27
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Alvegård T., Berg N., Baldetorp B., et al. Cellular DNA content and prognosis of high-grade soft tissue sarcoma: The Scandinavian sarcoma group experience. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 538–47
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dressier L. G., Seamer L. C., Owens M. A., Clark G. M., McGuire W. L. DNA flow cytometry and prognostic factors in 1331 frozen breast cancer specimens. Cancer 1988; 61: 420–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hedley D. W. Flow cytometry using paraffin-embedded tissue: five years on. Cytometry 1989; 10: 229–241
   PubMedGoogle Scholar