The nuclear DNA content of archival paraffin-embedded bladder cancer samples (70 patients) of WHO grades I–III has been measured by flow cytometry. The female/male ratio was 15/55. The mean follow-up time was 13 years (range 9.6–22.0 years). 37 of 70 (53%) patients had DNA index 1.0 (diploid DNA content), and the remaining 33 (47%) patients had an aneuploid tumor. There was no significant difference in the age (mean ± SD) of the patients having a diploid (66 ± 9 years) or an aneuploid tumor (68 ± 11 years) at the time of diagnosis. 47 deaths occurred during the follow-up period; 24 (51%) of these were due to bladder cancer (12 diploid, 12 aneuploid tumors). No significant difference was found after radical treatment during the disease-free interval (mean ± SD) between diploid (48 ± 45 months) and aneuploid (35.5 ± 35 months) groups of patients. Recurrences during the follow-up period were equally common among aneuploid and diploid tumors. A statistically significant relation between histological grade and survival could be demonstrated, but DNA ploidy and S phase fraction had little prognostic value in this respect. There was no statistically significant difference in survival between aneuploid (30%) and diploid (35%) groups of tumors during the follow-up period. The study suggests that flow cytometric determination of nuclear DNA ploidy from paraffin-embedded samples in bladder tumors does not add to the prognostic power of subjective histological grading.

Keywords:
Transitional cell carcinoma, DNA flow cytometry, S phase fraction, Bladder cancer, survival
This content is only available via PDF.
© 1990 S. Karger AG, Basel
1990
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.