title: DNA ploidy analysis in breast carcinoma. Comparison of unfixed and fixed tissue analyzed by image and flow cytometry.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To form a methodologic basis for DNA analysis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and invasive carcinoma (IC) of the breast, including very small lesions, by comparison of flow cytometric (FCM) and image cytometric (ICM) methods for DNA quantitation.
  
  
  METHODS
  The material consisted of 41 DCIS lesions and 26 ICs. FCM DNA analysis of unfixed, frozen samples were compared to (1) FCM of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue; (2) ICM of imprints; and (3) ICM of paraffin-embedded tissue sections.
  
  
  RESULTS
  FCM of unfixed tissue showed higher DNA measurement precision and a higher number of DNA nondiploid clones as compared to the other three methods. For the classification of DNA diploid/nondiploid cases, high concordance rates were found between the methods. Discordant cases were predominantly DNA neardiploid by FCM of unfixed tissue but DNA diploid by the other methods. The reproducibility of the DNA index (DI) was best in the interval 1.2 < DI < or = 2.2; it was 74% for FCM of fixed tissue and 79% for ICM of imprints. Clones with DI > 3 were found almost exclusively by ICM of imprints. For ICM of tissue sections, DI could not be reliably estimated. By ICM, contrary to FCM, a combined DNA diploid and nondiploid pattern was found frequently.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Each of the methods has its own advantages and limitations. If possible, FCM should be combined with ICM. FCM of unfixed tissue is superior to the other methods with respect to precise DI estimation. Alternatively, FCM of fixed tissue and ICM of imprints may both give a reliable estimate of DI. ICM of tissue sections can discriminate DNA diploid from nondiploid clones, except for neardiploid subpopulations, and permits the analysis of very small lesions.
authors.affiliation: Center for Breast Cancer Research, Institute of Pathology, Odense University Hospital, Denmark.
authors.forename: G L
authors.initials: GL
authors.lastname: Ottesen
authors.forename: I J
authors.initials: IJ
authors.lastname: Christensen
authors.forename: J K
authors.initials: JK
authors.lastname: Larsen
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Larsen
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Christiansen
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Baldetorp
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Linden
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Hansen
authors.forename: J A
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: Andersen
mesh_terms: D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000235:genetics* / Q000473:pathology; D002278:Carcinoma in Situ / Q000235:genetics* / Q000473:pathology; D018270:Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast / Q000235:genetics* / Q000473:pathology; D004273:DNA, Neoplasm / Q000032:analysis*; D005260:Female; D005404:Fixatives; D005434:Flow Cytometry / Q000379:methods*; D005557:Formaldehyde; D006801:Humans; D019044:Image Cytometry / Q000379:methods*; D011003:Ploidies; D016707:Tissue Fixation
chemical_list: D004273:DNA, Neoplasm; D005404:Fixatives; D005557:Formaldehyde