DNA Flow Cytometry Application to Clinical Trials in Breast Cancer

  • Lynn G. Dressler
Part of the Developments in Oncology book series (DION, volume 77)


The appropriate management of the breast cancer patient with early stage disease is a controversial/frustrating issue. Prognostic factors that could accurately predict tumor behavior would greatly aid both the clinician and the patient in their treatment decisions, The clinical trial setting affords one of the best opportunities to assess new treatment strategies as well as evaluate new prognostic markers. Several prognostic factors are currently being evaluated in a number of clinical trials throughout the United States, the most well established of these markers is DNA flow cytometry.


Breast Cancer Node Negative Patient Node Negative Disease Ploidy Status Node Negative Breast Cancer Patient 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Dressler LG, Bartow SA: DNA flow cytometry in solid tumors: Practical aspects and clinical applications. Seminars in Diagnostic Pathology 6:55–82, 1989.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coulson PB, Thornthwaite JR, Wooley TW, et al: Prognostic indicators including DNA histogram type, receptor content, and staging related to human breast cancer survival. Cancer Res. 44:4187–4196, 1984.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kallioniemi OP, Hietanen T, Mattila J, et al: Aneuploid DNA content and high S phase fraction of tumor cells are related to poor prognosis in patients with primary breast cancer. Eur. J. Clin. Oncol. 23:277–282, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kallioniemi OP, Blanco G, Alavaikko M, et al: Improving the prognostic value of DNA flow cytometry in breast cancer by combining DNA index and S phase fraction: A proposed classification. Cancer 62:2183–2190, 1988.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Siguurdsson H, Baldetorp B, Borg A, et al: Indicators of prognosis in node negative breast cancer. New Eng. J. Med. 322:1045–1053, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Muss HB, Kute TE, Case LD, et al: The relationship of flow cytometry to clinical and biologic characteristics in women with node negative primary breast cancer. Cancer 64:1894–1990, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clark GM, Owens MA, McGuire WL: A new S phase model predicts for recurrence for aneuploid as well as diploid node-negative breast cancer. Proc. ASCO 10:44, 1991.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Winchester DJ, Duda RB, August CZ, et al: The importance of DNA flow cytometry in node negative breast cancer. Arch. Surg. 125:886–889, 1990.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Klintenberg C, Stal O, Nordenskjold, et al: Proliferative index, cytosolic estrogen receptors and axillary node status as prognostic predictors in human mammary carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res. and Treat. 7 (Suppl) 99–106, 1986.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    O’Reilly SM, Camplejohn RS, Barnes DM, et al: Node negative breast cancer: Prognostic subgroups defined by tumor size and DNA flow cytometry. J. Clin. Oncol. 8:2040–2046, 1990.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dressier LG, Eudey L, Gray R, et al: Prognostic potential of DNA flow cytometry measurements in node-negative breast cancer patients: Preliminary analysis of an Intergroup Study (INT0076). J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 11:167–172, 1992.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ewers SB, Langstrom E, Baldetorp B, et al: Flow cytometric DNA analysis in primary breast carcinomas and clinicopathological correlations. Cytometry 5:408–419, 1984.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Beerman H, Klein Ph.M, Hermans J, et al: Prognostic significance of DNA-ploidy in a series of 690 primary breast cancer patients. Int. J. Cancer 45:34–39, 1990.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brifford M, Spyratos F, Tubiana-Hulin M, et al: Sequential cytopunctures during preoperative chemotherapy for breast cancer. Cytomorphologic changes, initial tumor ploidy and tumor regression. Cancer 63:631–637, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Spyrotas F, Brifford M, Tubiana-Hulin M, et al: Sequential cytopunctures during pre-operative chemotherapy for primary breast carcinoma. II. DNA flow cytometry changes during chemotherapy, tumor regression and short-term follow-up. Cancer 69:470–475, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Remvikos Y, Beuzeboc P, Zadjela A, et al: Correlation of pretreatment proliferative activity with response to cytotoxic chemotherapy. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 81:1383–1387, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Seymour L, Bezwoda WR, Meyer K: Response to second line hormone treatment for advanced breast cancer. Predictive value of ploidy determination. Cancer 65:2720–2724, 1990.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Osborne CK: DNA flow cytometry in early breast cancer. A step in the right direction. JNCI 81:1344–1345, 1989.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dressier L, Mangalik A, Bartow SA, et al: The use of DNA flow cytometry to characterize breast cancer cells affected by pre-surgical (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy. Proc. AACR 33:213, 1992.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lewis WE: Prognostic significance of flow cytometric DNA analyses in node negative breast patients. Cancer 65:2315–2320, 1990.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fisher B, Gunduz N, Costantino J, et al: DNA flow cytometric analysis of primary operable breast cancer. Relation of ploidy and S phase fraction to prognosis of patients in NSABP B-04. Cancer 68:1465–1475, 1991.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Intergroup Trial (0102). SWOG 8897. ECOG 2188. CALGB 8897. Phase III comparison of adjuvant chemotherapy with or without endocrine therapy in high risk, node negative breast cancer patients, and a natural history follow-up study in low risk, node negative patients. Activated August 1989.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    NSABP Protocol B-18. A “unified” trial to compare short, intensive preoperative systemic adriamycin, cyclophosphamide therapy with similar therapy administered in conventional postoperative fashion. B-18.2. A study to evaluate DNA histograms by flow cytometry.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Laboratory Study EST4189. Clinical significance and therapeutic impact of DNA flow cytometry measurements of ploidy and S phase and immunohistochemistry of the HER-2NEU oncogene product and steroid hormone receptors: Prediction of disease progression and response to therapy in Stage II breast cancer patients.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Southwest Oncology Group Laboratory Study 8854. Intergroup (INT0104). Prognostic value of cytometry measurements of breast cancer DNA from post menopausal patients with involved nodes and receptor positive tumors: A comparison protocol to SWOG 8814.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lynn G. Dressler

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations