Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

, Volume 41, Issue 1, pp 1–13 | Cite as

Immunocytochemical detection of breast cancer cells in marrow and peripheral blood of patients undergoing high dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell support

  • Wilbur A. Franklin
  • Elizabeth J. Shpall
  • Philip Archer
  • Charles S. Johnston
  • Sara Garza-Williams
  • Lisa Hami
  • Mitchell A. Bitter
  • Robert C. Bast
  • Roy B. Jones
Report

Summary

Detection of small numbers of breast cancer cells is important in staging the disease and can be helpful in assessing the efficacy of purging regimens prior to autologous stem cell infusion. Immunohistochemical methods are potentially useful and broadly applicable for this purpose since they are simple to perform, sensitive, and may be quite specific. We have used a combination of four monoclonal antibodies [260F9, 520C9, 317G5 (Baxter Corp); BrE-3 (Dr. R. Ceriani)] against tumor cell surface glycoproteins in a sensitive immunocytochemical assay to identify breast tumor cells in bone marrow and peripheral blood. Immunostained cytospin preparations were fixed prior to staining to preserve cytological details of immunopositive cells. After immunostaining, slides were counterstained with hematoxylin to confirm the identity of labeled cells. In cytocentrifuge experiments in which small numbers of CAMA human breast tumor cells were added to bone marrow mononuclear cells, a linear relationship between the number of tumor cells added and the number of tumor cells detected was obtained over a broad range of tumor cell concentrations. The probability of detecting tumor cells was dependent on the number of cytocentrifuge slides examined. When ten slides (5 million cells) were examined, the probability of detecting tumor at a concentration of 4 tumor cells per million bone marrow mononuclear cells was 98%. In clinical specimens, tumor cells were detected in marrow aspirates from 73 of 240 (30%) patients undergoing autologous transplantation, including 70 (37%) of 190 patients with clinical stage IV disease, 0 of 7 patients with clinical stage III disease, and 3 of 43 (7%) patients with clinical stage II disease. Seventy-three of 657 peripheral blood specimens from 26 of 155 patients (17%) contained breast cancer cells with counts ranging from 1 to 97 tumor cells per million leukocytes. Tumor cells were most frequently found in the blood of patients with stage IV disease [21 of 107 (20%)] but were also found in a substantial number [5 of 44 (11%)] of patients with stage II disease. Positive selection of CD34-positive hematopoietic progenitor cells as well as negative purging methods such as incubation with 4-hydroxyperoxy-cyclophosphamide (4-HC) were evaluated with respect to tumor cell depletion. Selection of CD34-positive progenitor cells from bone marrow or peripheral blood resulted in log reduction of 1 to > 4 tumor cells reinfused at autologous transplantation. A lesser log reduction (up to 1) was demonstrated following 4-HC purging. We conclude that properly performed and controlled immunocytochemical staining of bone marrow and peripheral blood cytospins is a sensitive and simple way to detect and quantitate breast cancer cells in hematopoietic specimens harvested for autotransplantation and that CD34-positive progenitor cell selection results in significant reduction in the number of breast cancer cells reinfused with marrow or peripheral blood stem cells.

Key words

bone marrow transplantation breast neoplasms immunohistochemistry monoclonal antibodies 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Peters WP, Shpall EJ, Jones RB et al.: High-dose combination alkylating agents with bone marrow support as initial treatment for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 6: 1368–1375, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Peters WP, Davis R, Shpall EJ et al.: Adjuvant chemotherapy involving high-dose combination cyclophosphamide, cisplatin, carmustine (CPA/CDDP/BCNU with bone marrow support for stage II/II breast cancer involving ten or more lymph nodes (CALGB 8782): A preliminary report. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 9: 22, 1990 (abstr)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kennedy MJ, Beveridge RA, Rowley SD, Gordon GB, Abeloff MD, Davidson NE: High-dose chemotherapy with reinfusion of purged autologous bone marrow following dose-intense induction as initial therapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 83: 920–926, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vincent MD, Powles TJ, Coombes RC, McElwain TJ: Late intensification with high-dose melphalan and autologous bone marrow support in breast cancer patients responding to conventional chemotherapy. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 21: 255–260, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dunphy FR, Spitzer G, Buzdar AU et al.: Treatment of estrogen receptor-negative or hormonally refractory breast cancer with double high-dose chemotherapy intensification and bone marrow support. J Clin Oncol 8: 1207–1216, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Williams SF, Mick R, Desser R, Golick J, Beschorner J, Bitran JD: High-dose consolidation therapy with autologous stem cell rescue in stage IV breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 7: 1824–1830, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hortobagyi GN: Bone metastases in breast cancer patients. Sem Oncol 18 (Suppl 5): 11–15, 1991Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tubiana-Hulin M: Incidence, prevalence and distribution of bone metastases. Bone 12 (Suppl 1): S9-S10, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sharp J, Kessinger A, Mann S: Detection and clinical significance of minimal tumor cell contamination of peripheral blood stem cell harvest. Int J Cell Cloning 10: 92–94, 1992Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brugger W, Bross KJ, Glatt B, Georgi F, Mertelsmann R, Kanz L: Mobilization of tumor cells and hematopoietic progenitor cells into peripheral blood of patients with solid tumors. Blood 83: 636–640, 1994PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shpall EJ, Jones RB, Bast RC et al.: 4-Hydroperoxycyclophosphamide purging of breast cancer from the mononuclear cell fraction of bone marrow in patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy and autologous marrow support: a phase I trial. J Clin Oncol 9: 85–93, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vredenburgh JJ, Shpall EJ, Ross M et al.: Immunopharmacologic bone marrow purging and high dose chemotherapy with autologous bone marow support (ABMS) for patients with metastatic breast cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 11: 58, 1992 (abstr)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shpall EJ, Bast RC, Joines WT et al.: Immunomagnetic purging of breast cancer from bone marrow for autologous transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 7: 145–151, 1991Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shpall EJ, Jones RB, Johnston C et al.: WR-2721 (Amifostine) shortens the engraftment period of 4-hydroperoxycyclophosphamide (4-HC) purged bone marrow patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow support (ABMS). Blood 78 (Suppl 1): 192a, 1991 (abstr)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shpall EJ, Jones RB, Franklin WA et al.: Transplantation of enriched CD34-positive autologous marrow into breast cancer patients following high-dose chemotherapy: Influence of CD34+ peripheral blood progenitors and growth factors on engraftment. J Clin Oncol 12: 28–36, 1994PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leslie DS, Johnston WW, Daly L et al.: Detection of breast carcinoma cells in human bone marrow using fluorescence-activated cell sorting and conventional cytology. Am J Clin Pathol 94: 8–13, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Molino A, Colobatti M, Bonetti F et al.: A comparative analysis of three different techniques for the detection of breast cancer cells in bone marrow. Cancer 67: 1033–1036, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Joshi SS, Novak DJ, Messbarger L, Maitreyan V, Weisenburger DD, Sharp JG: Levels of detection of tumor cells in human bone marrow with or without prior culture. Bone Marrow Transplant 6: 179–183, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vaughn WP, Mann SL, Garvey J et al.: Breast cancer detected in cell culture of histologically negative bone marrow predicts systemic relapse in patients with stage I, II, III and locally recurrent disease. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 9: 9, 1990 (abstr)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gribben JC, Freedmen AS, Neuberg D et al.: Immunologic purging of marrow assessed by PCR before autologous bone marrow transplantation for B-cell lymphoma. New Engl J Med 325: 1525–1533, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yuan R, Dowling P, Zucca E et al.: Detection of bc1-2/JH rearrangement in follicular and diffuse lymphoma: concordant results of peripheral blood and bone marrow analysis at diagnosis. Br J Cancer 67: 922–925, 1993PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sloane J, Ormerod MC, Neville AM: Potential pathological application of immunocytochemical methods to the detection of micrometastases. Cancer Res 40: 3079–3082, 1980PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dearnaley DP, Sloane JP, Ormerod MG et al.: Increased detection of mammary carcinoma cells in marrow smears using antisera to epithelial membrane antigen. Br J Cancer 44: 85–90, 1981PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schlimok G, Funke I, Holzmann B et al.: Micrometastatic cancer cells in bone marrow:In vitro detection with anticytokeratin andin vivo labeling with anti-17-1A monoclonal antibodies. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 84: 8672–8676, 1987PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cote RJ, Rosen PP, Hakes TB et al.: Monoclonal antibodies detect occult breast carcinoma metastases in the bone marrow of patients with early stage disease. Am J Surg Pathol 12: 333–340, 1988PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Osborne MP, Wong GY, Asina S, Old LJ, Cote RJ, Rosen PP: Sensitivity of immunocytochemical detection of breast cancer cells in human bone marrow. Cancer Res 51: 2706–2709, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Osborne MP, Rosen PP: Detection and management of bone marrow micrometastases in breast cancer. Oncol 8: 25–31, 1994Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mansi JL, Berger U, Easton D et al.: Micrometastases. Br Med J 295: 1093–1096, 1987Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cote RJ, Rosen PP, Lesser ML, Old LJ, Osborne MP: Prediction of early relapse in patients with operable breast cancer by detection of occult bone marrow micrometastases. J Clin Oncol 9: 1749–1756, 1991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Passos-Coelho J, Ross AA, Davis JM, Huelskamp A-M, Clarke B, Noga SJ, Davidson NE, Kennedy MJ: Bone marrow micrometastasis in chemotherapy-responsive advanced breast cancer: Effect ofex vivo purging with 4-hydroxycyclophosphamide. Cancer Res 54: 2266–2371, 1994Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ross AA, Cooper BW, Lazarus HM et al.: Incidence of tumor cell contamination in peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) collections from breast cancer patients. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 12: 69 (77), 1993Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sharp JC, Kessinger A, Mann S: Detection and clinical significance of minimal tumor cell contamination of peripheral blood stem cell harvests. Intl J Cell Clon 10 (Suppl 1): 92–92, 1992Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Frankel AE, Ring DB, Tringale F, Hsieh-Ma ST: Tissue distribution of breast cancer-associated antigens defined by monoclonal antibodies. J Biol Response Mod 4: 273–286, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Boyer CM, Borowitz MJ, McCarty KS et al.: Heterogeneity of antigen expression in benign and malignant breast and ovarian epithelial cells. Int J Cancer 43: 55–60, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Peterson JA, Zava DT, Duwe AK, Blank EW, Battifora H, Ceriani RL: Biochemical and histological characterization of antigens preferentially expressed on the surface and cytoplasm of breast carcinoma cells identified by monoclonal antibodies against the human milk fat globule. Hybridoma 9: 221–235, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Stahel RA, Gilks WR, Lehmann H-P, Schenker T: Third International Workshop on Lung Tumor and Differentiation Antigens: Overview of the results of the central data analysis. Int J Cancer 8: 6–26, 1994Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Fogh J, Wright WC, Loveless JD: Absence of HeLa cell contamination in 169 cell lines derived from human tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 58: 209–213, 1977PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Stein H, Gatter K, Asbahr H, Mason DY: Use of freezedried paraffin-embedded sections for immunohistologic staining with monoclonal antibodies. Lab Invest 52: 676–683, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Snedecor GW, Cochran WG: Statistical Methods. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, USA, Eighth Edition, 1989, p 200Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    ibid: Regression, pp 177–190Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    ibid: Fitting a straight line through the origin, pp 174–176Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Jones RB, Shpall EJ, Shogan J et al.: The Duke AFM program. Intensive induction chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Cancer 66: 431–436, 1990PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ngan BY, Nourse J, Cleary ML: Detection of chromosomal translocation t(14;18) within the minor cluster region of bcl-2 by polymerase chain reaction and direct genomic sequencing of the enzymatically amplified DNA in follicular lymphomas. Blood 73: 1759–1762, 1989PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wilbur A. Franklin
    • 1
  • Elizabeth J. Shpall
  • Philip Archer
    • 2
  • Charles S. Johnston
  • Sara Garza-Williams
  • Lisa Hami
  • Mitchell A. Bitter
  • Robert C. Bast
    • 3
  • Roy B. Jones
  1. 1.Department of PathologyUniversity of Colorado Health Sciences CenterDenverUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biometrics, and The Bone Marrow Transplant ProgramUniversity of Colorado Health Sciences CenterDenverUSA
  3. 3.M.D. Anderson Tumor InstituteHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations