Hat die impulszytophotometrische DNS-Bestimmung bei Hodentumoren prognostische Bedeutung?

  • G. Kleinhans
  • U. Hacker-Klom
Conference paper

Zusammenfassung

An 111 malignen Hodentumoren wurden impulszytophotometrische Zellkern-DNS-Bestimmungen durchgeführt und die Parameter Aneuploidie, Heterogenität, DNA-Index und relativer S-Phase-Anteil untersucht. Die Aneuploidierate lag bei 97,7%, die Heterogenitätsrate bei 19,6%. Ferner zeigte sich eine Häufung der Tumorstammlinien um den dreifachen DNS-Gehalt (Triploidie).

Keinem der Parameter kommt jedoch beim Hodentumor im Gegensatz zu anderen soliden Tumoren prognostische Bedeutung zu.

Abstract

The cellular DNA content of 111 malignant testicular germ cell tumors has been determined by flow cytometry. The following parameters were investigated: aneuploidy, heterogeneity, DNA index, and relative S-phase percentage. Aneuploidy is a good tumor marker, being found in 97.7% of cases. Heterogeneity was found in 19.6%. The modal value of the DNA index was around 3 c (triploidy).

None of these parameters is of importance for the prognosis of testicular cancer, in contrast to their prognostic value in many other solid tumors.

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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Atkin NB (1973) High chromosome numbers of seminomata and malignant teratomata of the testis: a review of data on 103 tumours. The British journal of cancer 28: 275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barlogie B, Raber NM, Schumann J, Johson TS, Drewinko B, Swartzendruber DE, Göhde W, Andreef M, Freireich EJ (1983) Flow cytometry in clinical cancer research. Cancer Research 43: 3982PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Büchner TH, Hiddemann W, Schumann J, Göhde W, Wörmann B, Ritter J, Kleinemeier B, von Bassewitz DB, Roessner A, Müller KM, Grundmann E (1985a) DNA-Aneuploidy — A common cell marker in human malignancies and its correlation to grade, stage and prognosis. In: Büchner TH, Bloomfield CD, Hiddemann W, Hossfeld DK, Schumann J (eds) Tumor — Aneuploidy. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo, pp 41Google Scholar
  4. Büchner TH, Hiddemann W, Wörmann B, Kleinemeier B, Schumann J, Göhde W, Ritter J, Müller KM, von Bassewitz DB, Roessner A, Grundmann E (1985b) Differential pattern of DNA-aneuploidy in human malignancies. Path Res Pract 179: 310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chin, JL, Pontes JE, Frankfurt OS (1985) Flow cytometric deoxyribonucleic acid analysis of primary and metastatic human renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 133: 582PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Fossa SD, Pettersen EO, Thorud E, Meluck JE, Ous S (1985) DNA-Flow cytometry in human testicular cancer. Cancer Letters Elsevier Scientific Publishers Ireland 28: 55Google Scholar
  7. Frederiksen P, Bichel P (1980) Sequential Flow Cytometric analysis of the single cell DNA content in recurrent human brain tumors. In: Laerum OD, Lundmo T, Thorud E (eds) Flow Cytometry IV. Universitetsforlaget, Oslo pp 398Google Scholar
  8. Gustafson H, Tribukait B, Esposti PL (1982a) DNA profile and tumour progression in patients with superficial bladder tumours. Urol Res 10: 13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gustafson H, Tribukait B, Esposti PL (1982b) DNA pattern, histological grade and multiplicity related to recurrence rate in superficial bladder tumours. Scand J Urol Nephrol 16: 135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gustafson H, Tribukait B, Esposti PL (1982c) The prognostic value of DNA analysis in primary carcinoma in situ of the urinary bladder. Scand J Urol Nephrol 16: 141PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hacker-Klom U, Kleinhans G, Göhde W, Körner F, Schumann J (1984) Flow cytometric analysis of testicular tumors. 13th European Congress of Cytology 27–29 September, Varna, BulgariaGoogle Scholar
  12. Hiddemann W, Büchner TH, Wörmann B, von Bassewitz DB, Müller KM, Ritter J, Hauss J, Kleinemeier HJ, Grundmann E (1985) Incidence and heterogeneity of DNA aneuploidies in solid tumors and acute leukemias. In: Büchner TH, Bloomfield CD, Hiddemann W, Hossfeld DK, Schumann J (eds) Tumor Aneuploidy. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo, pp 71Google Scholar
  13. Kleinhans G, Hacker-Klom U, Göhde W, Körner F, Schumann J (1985) Messung der DNS-Verteilungsmuster von menschlichen Hodentumoren. Acta chir Helv 52: 425Google Scholar
  14. Kleinhans G, Hacker-Klom U, Göhde W, Körner F, Schumann J (1986) Zellkinetische Untersuchungen menschlicher maligner Hodentumoren. Urologe A 25: 294PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kleinhans G, Langer EM, Hemmer J, Holzknecht A (1987) Zur Bedeutung der Aneuploidie beim Nierenzellkarzinom. Akt Urol 18: 142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kleinhans G, Langer EM, Pohl J, Leusmann DB (1987) Aneuploidie und Prognose beim Nierenzellkarzinom. Tumor Diagnostik u. Therapie 8: 97Google Scholar
  17. Ljungberg B, Forsslund G, Stenling R, Zetterberg A (1986) Prognostic significance of the DNA content in renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 135: 422PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Ljungberg B, Stenling R, Roos G (1985) DNA content in renal cell carcinoma with reference to tumour heterogeneity. Cancer 56: 503PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Meier EM (1983) Zellbiologischer Informationsgehalt der DNS-Verteilungen von Säugetierzellen und menschlichen Spontantumoren. Med Dissertation Universität MünsterGoogle Scholar
  20. Olszewski W, Darzynkiewicz Z, Rosen PP, Schwartz MK, Melamed MR (1981) Flow Cytometry of Breast Carcinoma: I. Relation of DNA ploidy level to histology and estrogen receptor. Cancer 48: 980PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Otto U, Baisch H, Huland H, Klöppel G (1984) Tumor cell deoxyribonucleic acid content and prognosis in human renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 132: 237PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Schumann J, Tilkorn H, Göhde W, Ehring F, Straub C (1981) Zytogenetik maligner Melanome. Verh d Dtsch Dermatol Ges. Der Hautarzt Suppl V 32: 62Google Scholar
  23. Skakkebaek NE (1984) Microkarzinome und atypische Keimzellen des Hodens: Pathologie Vortrag 40. Jahresversammlung der Schweizer Gesellschaft für Urologie Lugano, 8.–10. 11. 1984Google Scholar
  24. Tentscher M, Helpap B, Hildenbrand G, Weißbach L (1982) Das aggressive Seminom — Klinische und morphologische Untersuchungen. In: Weißbach L, Hildenbrand G (Hrsg) Register und Verbundstudie für Hodentumoren — Bonn: Ergebnisse einer prospektiven Untersuchung. Zuckschwerdt München: 287Google Scholar
  25. Tribukait B (1984) Flow cytometry in surgical pathology and cytology of tumors of the genitourinary tract. In: Koss LG, Colemann DV Masson Publ USA Inc: p 163Google Scholar
  26. Tribukait B, Gustafson H (1980) Impulscytophotometrische DNS-Untersuchungen bei Blasenkarzinomen. Onkologie 6: 278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tribukait B, Gustafson H, Esposti P (1979) Ploidy and proliferation in human bladder tumors as measured by flow-cytofluormetric DNA-analysis and its relations to histopathology and cytology. Cancer 43: 1742PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tribukait B, Gustafson H, Esposti PL (1982) The significance of ploidy and proliferation in the clinical and biological evaluation of bladder tumours: a study of 100 untreated cases. Br J Urol 54: 130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wolley RC, Schreiber K, Koss LG, Karas M, Sherman A (1982) DNA Distribution in human colon carcinoma and its relationship to clinical behavior. J Natl Cancer Inst 69: 15PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Zante J, Schumann J, Barlogie B, Göhde W, Büchner TH (1976) New preparation and staining procedures for specific and rapid analysis of DNA distributions. In: Göhde W, Schumann J, Büchner TH (eds) II. International Symposion on Pulse Cytophotometry. European Press, Ghent pp 97Google Scholar
  31. Zimmermann A (1980) Aneuploidie bei malignen Hodentumoren und ihren Lymphknotenmetastasen. Urologe A 19: 391PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Zimmermann A (1981) Die Bedeutung der durchflußzytophotometrischen Zellkern-DNS-Bestimmung für die Diagnostik urologischer Erkrankungen. Habilitationsschrift, Universität GöttingenGoogle Scholar
  33. Zimmermann A, Truss F (1980) Die DNS-Bestimmung bei der Diagnostik von Hodenerkrankungen. Verh Ber Dtsch Ges Urol, 31 Tgg, München 1979, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York pp 362Google Scholar
  34. Zimmermann A, Truss F (1980) The prognostic power of flow-through cytophotometric DNA determinations for testicular diseases. Analytical and Quantitative Cytology 2: 247PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Kleinhans
  • U. Hacker-Klom

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations