Image analysis versus flow cytometry for DNA ploidy quantitation of solid tumors: a comparison of six methods of sample preparation.

P. O. Danque, H. B. Chen, J. Patil, J. Jagirdar, G. Orsatti, F. Paronetto

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

52 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

With the availability of user-friendly interactive image analysis instruments for DNA analysis, there is a growing need for comparison with the established methodology of flow cytometry. We have compared the results of DNA ploidy quantitation in 12 solid tumors prepared by six different techniques of sample preparation: flow cytometry of fresh cell suspensions and of nuclei isolated from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue; and image analysis of touch preparations, of disaggregated cells from paraffin-embedded tissue as well as of 3- and 7-microns-thick tissue sections. Complete agreement in DNA ploidy results obtained by the six methods was found in six out of 12 solid tumors. Image analysis of touch preparations detected most tetraploid and multiple aneuploid peaks. Sections of 7-microns-thick tissue gave better histogram quality than 3-microns-thick sections, however tetraploid peaks were not resolved in one case. Image analysis of disaggregated paraffin-embedded tumor showed comparable ploidy to fresh touch preparations in seven out of 12 cases, the discrepancies being due to loss of tetraploid or multiple aneuploid peaks. Flow cytometry gave good histograms, but tetraploid and multiple aneuploid peaks were occasionally not detected. Each method presents advantages and disadvantages. Flow cytometry and image analysis are complementary methods for DNA quantitation, and more than one method may be necessary to confirm the DNA content of solid tumors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)270-275
Number of pages6
JournalModern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc
Volume6
Issue number3
StatePublished - May 1993
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Tetraploidy
Ploidies
Flow Cytometry
Touch
Aneuploidy
Paraffin
DNA
Neoplasms
Cell Nucleus
Formaldehyde
Suspensions
Complementary DNA

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Cite this

Image analysis versus flow cytometry for DNA ploidy quantitation of solid tumors : a comparison of six methods of sample preparation. / Danque, P. O.; Chen, H. B.; Patil, J.; Jagirdar, J.; Orsatti, G.; Paronetto, F.

In: Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc, Vol. 6, No. 3, 05.1993, p. 270-275.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{174209bcc297410f850adef84043e37b,
title = "Image analysis versus flow cytometry for DNA ploidy quantitation of solid tumors: a comparison of six methods of sample preparation.",
abstract = "With the availability of user-friendly interactive image analysis instruments for DNA analysis, there is a growing need for comparison with the established methodology of flow cytometry. We have compared the results of DNA ploidy quantitation in 12 solid tumors prepared by six different techniques of sample preparation: flow cytometry of fresh cell suspensions and of nuclei isolated from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue; and image analysis of touch preparations, of disaggregated cells from paraffin-embedded tissue as well as of 3- and 7-microns-thick tissue sections. Complete agreement in DNA ploidy results obtained by the six methods was found in six out of 12 solid tumors. Image analysis of touch preparations detected most tetraploid and multiple aneuploid peaks. Sections of 7-microns-thick tissue gave better histogram quality than 3-microns-thick sections, however tetraploid peaks were not resolved in one case. Image analysis of disaggregated paraffin-embedded tumor showed comparable ploidy to fresh touch preparations in seven out of 12 cases, the discrepancies being due to loss of tetraploid or multiple aneuploid peaks. Flow cytometry gave good histograms, but tetraploid and multiple aneuploid peaks were occasionally not detected. Each method presents advantages and disadvantages. Flow cytometry and image analysis are complementary methods for DNA quantitation, and more than one method may be necessary to confirm the DNA content of solid tumors.",
author = "Danque, {P. O.} and Chen, {H. B.} and J. Patil and J. Jagirdar and G. Orsatti and F. Paronetto",
year = "1993",
month = "5",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
pages = "270--275",
journal = "Modern Pathology",
issn = "0893-3952",
publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Image analysis versus flow cytometry for DNA ploidy quantitation of solid tumors

T2 - a comparison of six methods of sample preparation.

AU - Danque, P. O.

AU - Chen, H. B.

AU - Patil, J.

AU - Jagirdar, J.

AU - Orsatti, G.

AU - Paronetto, F.

PY - 1993/5

Y1 - 1993/5

N2 - With the availability of user-friendly interactive image analysis instruments for DNA analysis, there is a growing need for comparison with the established methodology of flow cytometry. We have compared the results of DNA ploidy quantitation in 12 solid tumors prepared by six different techniques of sample preparation: flow cytometry of fresh cell suspensions and of nuclei isolated from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue; and image analysis of touch preparations, of disaggregated cells from paraffin-embedded tissue as well as of 3- and 7-microns-thick tissue sections. Complete agreement in DNA ploidy results obtained by the six methods was found in six out of 12 solid tumors. Image analysis of touch preparations detected most tetraploid and multiple aneuploid peaks. Sections of 7-microns-thick tissue gave better histogram quality than 3-microns-thick sections, however tetraploid peaks were not resolved in one case. Image analysis of disaggregated paraffin-embedded tumor showed comparable ploidy to fresh touch preparations in seven out of 12 cases, the discrepancies being due to loss of tetraploid or multiple aneuploid peaks. Flow cytometry gave good histograms, but tetraploid and multiple aneuploid peaks were occasionally not detected. Each method presents advantages and disadvantages. Flow cytometry and image analysis are complementary methods for DNA quantitation, and more than one method may be necessary to confirm the DNA content of solid tumors.

AB - With the availability of user-friendly interactive image analysis instruments for DNA analysis, there is a growing need for comparison with the established methodology of flow cytometry. We have compared the results of DNA ploidy quantitation in 12 solid tumors prepared by six different techniques of sample preparation: flow cytometry of fresh cell suspensions and of nuclei isolated from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue; and image analysis of touch preparations, of disaggregated cells from paraffin-embedded tissue as well as of 3- and 7-microns-thick tissue sections. Complete agreement in DNA ploidy results obtained by the six methods was found in six out of 12 solid tumors. Image analysis of touch preparations detected most tetraploid and multiple aneuploid peaks. Sections of 7-microns-thick tissue gave better histogram quality than 3-microns-thick sections, however tetraploid peaks were not resolved in one case. Image analysis of disaggregated paraffin-embedded tumor showed comparable ploidy to fresh touch preparations in seven out of 12 cases, the discrepancies being due to loss of tetraploid or multiple aneuploid peaks. Flow cytometry gave good histograms, but tetraploid and multiple aneuploid peaks were occasionally not detected. Each method presents advantages and disadvantages. Flow cytometry and image analysis are complementary methods for DNA quantitation, and more than one method may be necessary to confirm the DNA content of solid tumors.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027601113&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027601113&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8346174

AN - SCOPUS:0027601113

VL - 6

SP - 270

EP - 275

JO - Modern Pathology

JF - Modern Pathology

SN - 0893-3952

IS - 3

ER -