Zangwill B C, Balsara G, Dunton C, Varello M, Rebane B A, Hernandez E, Atkinson B F
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Medical College of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia 19129.
Cancer. 1993 Apr 1;71(7):2261-7. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19930401)71:7<2261::aid-cncr2820710716>3.0.co;2-t.
In ovarian carcinoma, DNA ploidy measured by flow cytometric (FCM) analysis is an independent prognostic factor. However, limited sampling may underestimate the extent of ploidy variation (i.e., heterogeneity). Uncovering these hidden populations may explain poor outcomes in patients with ostensibly favorable ploidy patterns. The authors examined ploidy in a mean of 6.4 tumor samples per patient to better assess the occurrence of heterogeneity.
FCM analysis was performed on multiple samples from 19 cases of advanced, serous ovarian carcinoma. Tumors were considered as heterogeneous by two definitions: (1) the presence of more than one ploidy pattern (e.g., diploidy and tetraploidy); and (2) the existence of DNA indices of sufficient variation so as to characterize two distinct populations of neoplastic cells.
With the first definition, 47% (9 of 19) of the tumors were heterogeneous, 37% (7 of 19) homogeneous-aneuploid, and 16% (3 of 19) homogeneous-diploid. These three groups showed no significant differences in histologic type, grade, patient age, stage, or survival. With the second definition, 27% (4 of 15) of the non-diploid cases were heterogeneous and 73% (11 of 15) were homogeneous. When these two groups were compared as to type, grade, patient age, and stage, no significant differences were demonstrated. However, the median survival of the patients with heterogeneous tumors was significantly longer (P < 0.05) than the survival of patients with homogeneous tumors.
Ovarian carcinoma heterogeneity is high when multiple sites are assayed. This suggests conservative interpretation of ploidy when only a single sample is analyzed and examination of multiple samples when practicable.
在卵巢癌中,通过流式细胞术(FCM)分析测定的DNA倍体是一个独立的预后因素。然而,有限的采样可能会低估倍体变异的程度(即异质性)。揭示这些隐藏的群体可能有助于解释表面上倍体模式良好的患者预后不佳的原因。作者对每位患者平均6.4个肿瘤样本进行倍体检测,以更好地评估异质性的发生情况。
对19例晚期浆液性卵巢癌的多个样本进行FCM分析。根据两种定义将肿瘤视为异质性肿瘤:(1)存在不止一种倍体模式(例如,二倍体和四倍体);(2)存在足够变异的DNA指数,以表征两个不同的肿瘤细胞群体。
根据第一种定义,47%(19例中的9例)的肿瘤为异质性肿瘤,37%(19例中的7例)为均一性非整倍体肿瘤,16%(19例中的3例)为均一性二倍体肿瘤。这三组在组织学类型、分级、患者年龄、分期或生存率方面无显著差异。根据第二种定义,27%(15例中的4例)的非二倍体病例为异质性肿瘤,73%(15例中的11例)为均一性肿瘤。当比较这两组的类型、分级、患者年龄和分期时,未发现显著差异。然而,异质性肿瘤患者的中位生存期明显长于均一性肿瘤患者(P < 0.05)。
对多个部位进行检测时,卵巢癌的异质性较高。这表明在仅分析单个样本时,对倍体的解释应保守,并且在可行时对多个样本进行检测。