Detection of Glycosaminoglycans in Human Gliomas by Histochemical Methods
Sulphatized mucopolysaccharides or glycosaminoglycans (GAG) were examined by histochemical methods in biopsy specimens of 69 human cerebral gliomas. The intensity of cell-surface associated GAGs, particularly of the -SO 3 - groups, was highest in isomorphic oligodendrogliomas and astrocytomas except for pilocytic forms. It showed progressive decrease with increasing degree of anaplasia of these tumors. Anaplastic gliomas only rarely show a very weak reaction for -SO 3 - groups which was completely absent in glioblastomas, where GAGs are only found in blood vessel walls and mesenchymal stroma. In accordance with observations in experimental gliomas, the rapid loss of membrane-associated GAGs in anaplastic gliomas is considered to indicate a progressive cellular dedifferentiation of glial cells due to hitherto unknown metabolic changes.
Key wordsglycosaminoglycans human glioma histochemistry
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 4.Federico A, Benedetta C Di (1979) Glycosaminoglycans and glycoproteins of human brain during development. Perspectives in Inherited Metabolic Disease, Vol 2:101–111Google Scholar
- 5.Gibbons RA (1963) The sensitivity of the neuraminosidic linkage in mucosubstances towards acid and towards neuraminidase. Biochem J 89:390–391Google Scholar
- 7.Graumann W, Clauss W (1958) Weitere Untersuchungen zur Spezifität der histochemischen Polysaccharid-Eisenreaktion. Acta Histochem (Jena) 6:1–7Google Scholar
- 11.Pearse, AGE (1968) Histochemistry, theoretical and applied, 3rd ed vol 1. Churchill, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 12.Schiffer D, Giordana MT (1975) Acid mucopolysaccharides in experimental brain tumors. Proc VIII Int Congr. Neuropathol, Vol. I. Excerpta Medica, Amsterdam pp 533–540Google Scholar
- 16.Stavrou D, Lubitz W, Osterkam V, Birkmayer G, Schmid DO, Anzil AP (1978) Untersuchungen über das Glycoproteinmuster von Plasmamembranen experimenteller Astrozytome. In: Jellinger K, Gross H (eds) Current Topics in Neuropathology, Vol 5. Facultas, Wien pp 14–24Google Scholar