Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mitotic rate, DNA distribution, and chromatinin situ sensitivity to heparin in breast cancer

  • Report
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The purpose of this study was to characterize breast carcinomas by cell kinetic parameters. Mitotic rate (MR) and flow cytometrically (FCM) measured cell cycle distribution as well as chromatin testing in situ employing heparin for determination of activated chromatin, provided the following results:

MR counted in 73 unselected carcinomas showed an increase up to a tumor size of 4.2cm (p < 0.05); beyond this diameter, the MR was found to decrease.

In T1-T2 carcinomas, cell cycle stage analysis yielded higher percentages of cells in S and G2M phase for ductal (13% and 12%, N = 22) than for lobular (8% and 7%, N = 8) node-negative carcinomas (p < 0.002). In ductal carcinomas, lymph node involvement was reflected by higher % G2M values (15%, N = 26) compared with negative cases (12%, N = 22) (p < 0.05).

Ductal node-positive T3-T4 carcinomas (N = 10) revealed a higher % S value (16%) than their T1-T2 counterparts. A correlation between MR and % G2M was established only up to a tumor size of 4.2 cm (r = 0.39, p < 0.05).

A highly sensitive (‘H’) and a poorly sensitive (‘P’) subgroup of carcinomas with respect to heparininduced changes in fluorescence intensity of the G1/0 peak of the DNA aneuploid cell line were identified, as previously shown [1]. These subgroups were here updated with a larger number of carcinomas and were limited to T1-T2 cancers (N = 57). Group ‘H’ included more younger patients (p < 0.005), less cases with nodal involvement in ductal carcinomas (p < 0.05), and lower % G2M values in lobular node-negative cases (p < 0.05), than group ‘P’. DNA diploid cells always existing in DNA aneuploid carcinomas are more sensitive than their aneuploid counterparts (p < 0.01); however, they strengthen the stratification to ‘H’ and ‘P’. We suggest ‘H’ carcinomas to be less aggressive than ‘P’ carcinomas. Small breast carcinomas are recommended to cell kinetic investigations for individualizing adjuvant therapy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Weiß H, Kunde D, Streller B: DNA distributions in human normal, precancerous and cancerous breast tissue. II Differences in heparin mediated changes in DNA distributions. Oncology 45: 214–223, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Meyer JS, Province M: Proliferative index of breast carcinoma by thymidine labeling: prognostic power independent of stage, estrogen and progesterone receptors. Breast Cancer Res Treat 12: 191–204, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Olszewski W, Darzynkiewicz Z, Rosen PP, Schwartz MK, Melamed MR: Flow cytometry of breast carcinoma. II. Relation of tumor cell cycle distribution to histology and estrogen receptor. Cancer 48: 985–988, 1981

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fallenius AG, Franzen SA, Auer GU: Predictive value of nuclear DNA content in breast cancer in relation to clinical and morphologic factors. Cancer 62: 521–530, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Silvestrini R, Daidone MG, Gasparini G: Cell kinetics as a prognostic marker in node-negative breast cancer. Cancer 56: 1982–1987, 1985

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hery M, Gioanni J, Lalanne CM, Namer M, Courdi A: The DNA labelling index: a prognostic factor in node-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 9: 207–211, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dressler LG, Seamer LC, Owens MA, Clark GM, McGuire WL: DNA flow cytometry and prognostic factors in 1331 frozen breast cancer specimens. Cancer 61: 420–427, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gurley LR, Walters RA, Hildebrand CE, Ratleff RL, Hohmann GP, Tobey RA: Sequential biochemical events related to cell proliferation. In Rost TL, Gifford EM (eds), Mechanisms and control of cell division. Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Stroudsburg, 1977, pp 3–43

  9. Stokke T, Steen HB: Distinction of leucocyte classes based on chromatin-structure-dependent DNA-binding of 7-Aminoactinomycin D. Cytometry 8: 576–583, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Stokke T, Holte H, Steen HB: In vitro and in vivo activation of B-lymphocytes: A flow cytometric study of chromatin structure employing 7-Aminoactinomycin D. Cancer Res 48: 6708–6714, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ritzen M, Carlsson SA, Darzynkiewicz Z: Cytochemical evidence of nucleoprotein changes in rat adrenal cortex following hypophysectomy or dexamethasone suppression. Exptl Cell Res 70: 462–465, 1972

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Arnold EA, Yawn DH, Brown DG, Wyllie RC, Coffey DS: Structural alterations in the isolated rat liver nuclei after removal of template restriction by polyanions. J Cell Biol 53: 737–757, 1972

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cook RT, Aikawa M: The effects of heparin on endogenous DNA polymerase activity of rat liver nuclei and chromatin fractions. Exptl Cell Res 78: 257–270, 1973

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Frenster JH: Biochemistry and molecular biophysics of heterochromatin and euchromatin. Front Biol 15: 251–276, 1969

    Google Scholar 

  15. Frenster JH: Ultrastructural probes of chromatin within living human lymphocytes. Nature New Biol 236: 175–176, 1972

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hildebrand CE, Tobey RA: Cell-cycle-specific changes in chromatin organization. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 63: 134–139, 1975

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hildebrand CE, Gurley LR, Tobey RA, Walters RA: Action of heparin on mammalian nuclei I Differential extraction of histone H1 and cooperative removal of histones from chromatin. Biochim Biophys Acta 477: 295–311, 1977

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hildebrand CE, Tobey RA, Gurley LR, Walters RA: Action of heparin on mammalian nuclei II Cell-cycle-specific changes in chromatin organization correlate temporally with histone H1 phosphorylation. Biochim Biophys Acta 517: 486–499, 1978

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Baserga R, Nicolini C: Chromatin structure and function in proliferating cells. Biochim Biophys Acta 458: 109–134, 1976

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lurquin PF: The use of intercalating dye molecules in the study of chromatin structure. Chem Biol Interact 8: 303–313, 1974

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Seligy VL, Lurquin PF: Relationship between dye binding and template activity of isolated avain chromatin. Nature New Biol 243: 20–21, 1973

    Google Scholar 

  22. Smets LA: Pulse-cytophotometric measurement of chromatin activation and inactivation. In: Haanen CAM, Hillen HEP, Wessels JMC (eds) Pulse-Cytophotometry. European Press, Ghent, 1975, pp 110–120

    Google Scholar 

  23. Darzynkiewicz Z, Traganos F, Kapuscinski J, Stainano-Coico L, Melamed MR: Accessibility of DNA in situ to various fluorochromes: Relationship to chromatin changes during erythroid differentiation of Friend leukemia cells. Cytometry 5: 355–363, 1984

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Weiß H, Heinz U, Gütz HJ, Schälicke W: Difference in chromatin sensitivity to heparin of chronic atrophic gastritis, of carcinoma-free and carcinoma-bearing stomach in comparison with normal gastric mucosa and gastric carcinoma as revealed by flow cytometry. Cytometry 4: 268–276, 1983

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gentili C, Sanfilippo O, Silvestrini R: Cell proliferation and its relationship to clinical features and relapse in breast cancers. Cancer 48: 974–979, 1981

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. WHO: Histological typing of breast tumor, Geneva, 1981

  27. Internal Union against Cancer: TNM classification of malignant tumors, Breast. Geneva, 1978

  28. Zante J, Schumann J, Barlogie B, Göhde W, Büchner T: New preparating and staining procedures for specific and rapid analysis of DNA distribution. In: Göhde W, Schumann J, Büchner T (eds) Pulse Cytophotometry II. European Press, Ghent, 1976, pp 97–106

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hiddemann W, Schumann J, Andreeff M, Barlogie B, Herman CJ, Leif RC, Mayall BH, Murphy RF, Sandberg AA: Convention nomenclature for DNA cytometry. Cytometry 5: 445–446, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  30. Streller B: Mathematische Auswertung von DNA-Verteilungskurven. In: Symposium Automatisierte Informationsverarbeitung im Krankenhaus. Berlin, 1984, pp 73

  31. Mann HB, Whitney DR: On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Ann Math Statist 18: 50, 1947. Quoted to Weber E: Grundriss der Biologischen Statistik. VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag Jena 1961, pp 402

  32. Kaplan EL, Meier P: Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am statist Ass 53: 457–481, 1958

    Google Scholar 

  33. van der Linden JC, Lindemann J, Baak JPA, Meyer CTLM, Herman CJ: The multivariate prognostic index and nuclear DNA content are independent prognostic factors in primary breast cancer patients. Cytometry 10: 56–61, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Stenkvist B, Bengtsson E, Dahlquist B, Eklund G, Eriksson O, Jarkrans T, Nordin B: Predicting breast cancer recurrence. Cancer 50: 2884–2893, 1982

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Baak JP, van Dop H, Kurver PHJ, Hermans J: The value of morphometry to classic prognosticators in breast cancer. Cancer 56: 374–382, 1985

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Stenkvist B, Bengtsson E, Eriksson O, Jarkrans T, Nordin B, Westman-Naeser S: Correlation between cytometric features and mitotic frequency in human breast carcinoma. Cytometry 1: 287–291, 1981

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Schiodt T: Breast carcinoma. A histologic and prognostic study of 650 followed-up cases. Ejnar Munksgaard, Copenhagen 1966

    Google Scholar 

  38. Sears HF, Janus C, Levy W, Hopson R, Creech R, Grotzinger P: Breast cancer without axillary metastasis. Are there high-risk biologic subpopulations? Cancer 50: 1820–1827, 1982

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Darzynkiewicz Z, Traganos M, Andreeff M, Sharpless T, Melamed MR: Different sensitivity of chromatin to acid denaturation in quiescent and cycling cells as revealed by flow cytometry. J Histochem Cytochem 27: 478–485, 1979

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Meyer JS, Prey MU, Babcock DS, McDivitt RW: Breast carcinoma cell kinetics, morphology, stage and host characteristics. Lab Invest 54: 41–51, 1986

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Rosen PP, Saigo PE, Braun DW, Weathers E, De Palo A: Predictors of recurrence in stage I (T1 NO MO) breast carcinoma. Ann Surg 193: 15–25, 1981

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Abe R, Ueki H: Flow cytometric analysis for assessing the malignant potential of breast cancer. J Surg Oncol 36: 259–262, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Darzynkiewicz Z: Metabolic and kinetic compartments of the cell cycle distinguished by multiparameter flow cytometry. In: Skehan PH, Friedman SJ (eds) Growth, Cancer, and the Cell Cycle. The Human Press, Clifton, New Jersey, 1984, pp 249–278

    Google Scholar 

  44. Romanini MGM: Round table: New approaches to the ‘in situ’ study of chromatin. Basic Appl Histochem 25: 283–322, 1981

    Google Scholar 

  45. Roti Roti JL, Wright WD, Higashikubo R, Dethlefsen LA: DNase I sensitivity of nuclear DNA measured by flow cytometry. Cytometry 6: 101–108, 1985

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Darzynkiewicz Z, Traganos F, Sharpless T, Melamed MR: Thermally induced changes in chromatin of isolated nuclei and of intact cells as revealed by acridine orange staining. Biochim Biophys Res Commun 59: 392–399, 1974

    Google Scholar 

  47. Nicolini C, Baserga R: Circular dichroism and ethidium bromide binding studies of chromatin from WI-38 fibroblasts stimulated to proliferate. Chem Biol Interactions 11: 101–111, 1979

    Google Scholar 

  48. Rovera G, Baserga R: Effect of nutritional changes on chromatin template activity and nonhistone chromosomal protein synthesis in WI-38 and 3T6 cells. Exptl Cell Res 78: 118–126, 1973

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Farber J, Rovera G, Baserga R: Template activity of chromatin during stimulation of cellular proliferation in human diploid fibroblasts. Biochem J 122: 189–195, 1971

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kunicka JE, Olszewski W, Melamed MR, Darzynkiewicz Z: DNA in situ sensitivity to denaturation in human breast carcinomas (‘Abstract’) Cytometry Suppl 2, 10, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  51. Weiß H, Kunde D, Streller B: DNA distributions in human normal, precancerous and cancerous breast tissue I Ploidy and cell cycle distribution. Arch Geschwulstforsch 56: 373–379, 1986

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. van den Hooff A: The part played by the stroma in carcinogenesis. Perspect Biol Med 27: 498–509, 1984

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Delinassios JG, Pandis NB, Margaronis M, Kottaridis SD: Double minutes in fibroblast-like cells isolated from human tumors. Experientia 37: 569–570, 1981

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Schürch W, Seemayer TA, Lagace R: Stromal myofibroblasts in primary invasive and metastatic carcinomas. Virchows Arch (A) 391: 125–139, 1981

    Google Scholar 

  55. Schürch W, Lagace R, Seemayer TA: Myofibroblastic stromal reaction in retracted scirrhous carcinoma of the breast. Surg, Gynecol and Obstet 154: 351–358, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  56. Müller H, Schmidts HL, Sakuma (a. G.) T, Stutte HJ: Morphologische Untersuchungen des Stromas von Mamma-Carcinomen. Verh Dtsch Ges Path 69: 264–268, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  57. Bässler R, Dittmann AM, Dittrich M: Mononuclear stromal reactions in mammary carcinoma, with special reference to medullary carcinomas with a lymphoid infiltrate. Virchows Arch (A) 393: 75–91, 1981

    Google Scholar 

  58. Millett JA, Husain OAN, Bitensky L, Chayen J: Feulgenhydrolysis profiles in cells exfoliated from the cervix uteri: a potential aid in the diagnosis of malignancy. J Clin Pathol 35: 345–349, 1982

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Hansson J, Tribukait B, Lavensohn R, Ringborg U: Flow cytofluorometric DNA analysis of metastases of human malignant melanomas. Analyt Quant Cytol 25: 99–104, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  60. Tribukait B: Flow cytometry in assessing the clinical aggressiveness of geneto-urinary neoplasms. World J Urol 5: 108–122, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  61. Wijkström H, Granberg-Ohman I, Tribukait B: Chromosomal and DNA Patterns in transitional cell bladder carcinoma. Cancer 53: 1718–1723, 1984

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Central Institute for Cancer Research of the Academy of Sciences of GDR, Lindenberger Weg 80, GDR-1115, Berlin, GDR

    Hildegard Weiß, Hans-Peter Brasching & Ulrich Peek

  2. Dept. Diagnostic Radiology, Humboldt University, Medical School (Charite), Berlin, GDR

    Alexander Bock

  3. St. Joseph Hospital, Berlin, GDR

    Frank Mauthner

Authors
  1. Hildegard Weiß
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hans-Peter Brasching
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alexander Bock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Frank Mauthner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ulrich Peek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Weiß, H., Brasching, HP., Bock, A. et al. Mitotic rate, DNA distribution, and chromatinin situ sensitivity to heparin in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Tr 16, 41–50 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01806574

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01806574

Key words

Search

Navigation