This Article Order Full text via Infotrieve Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Qian, J. Articles by Jenkins, R. B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Qian, J. Articles by Jenkins, R. B.

American Journal of Pathology, Vol 149, 1193-1199, Copyright © 1996 by American Society for Investigative Pathology

REGULAR ARTICLES

Comparison of fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis of isolated nuclei and routine histological sections from paraffin-embedded prostatic adenocarcinoma specimens

J Qian, DG Bostwick, S Takahashi, TJ Borell, JA Brown, MM Lieber and RB Jenkins
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA.

Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is a powerful tool for quantitative analysis of chromosomes and genes and can be applied in a variety of specimens, including cell cultures, isolated nuclei from fresh and fixed tissues, and histological tissue sections. However, the results of FISH analysis of isolated nuclei in prostate cancer have not been previously compared with those from histological sections from the paraffin-embedded tissue blocks. To compare these methods, we studied isolated nuclei derived from 50-microns sections and adjacent 5-microns tissue sections from 10 cases of benign nodular hyperplasia of the prostate and 16 cases of prostatic carcinoma. FISH analysis employed centromere-specific probes for chromosomes 7, 8, 11, and 12. In benign tissue, the percentage of nuclei with three or more signals for chromosomes 7, 8, 11, and 12 was less than 3% for both isolated nuclei and tissue sections. However, the percentage of nuclei with no and one signals was less than 8% for isolated nuclei and more than 24% for tissue sections. In prostatic carcinoma, numeric chromosomal anomalies were found in 75% of cases by both FISH methods. However, isolated nuclei had more chromosomal tetrasomy than tissue sections (mean, 9.2 to 11.0% versus 5.1 to 5.6%, respectively). Conversely, intratumor heterogeneity of chromosomal anomalies was identified in 5 cases by FISH analysis of tissue sections but not in isolated nuclei. Cancer ploidy analysis by FISH correlated well with ploidy analysis by flow cytometry, although FISH was more sensitive for aneuploidy. We conclude that FISH analysis of isolated nuclei and histological tissue sections from paraffin blocks are reliable methods for detection of chromosomal anomalies in archival tissue of prostate cancer, although each method has advantages and disadvantages.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S Schwarz, M Rechenmacher, T Filbeck, R Knuechel, H Blaszyk, A Hartmann, and G Brockhoff Value of multicolour fluorescence in situ hybridisation (UroVysion) in the differential diagnosis of flat urothelial lesions J. Clin. Pathol., March 1, 2008; 61(3): 272 - 277. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Singh, A. Stoffel, S. Gogineni, A. Poluri, D. G. Pfister, A. R. Shaha, A. Pathak, G. Bosl, C. Cordon-Cardo, J. P. Shah, et al. Amplification of the 3q26.3 Locus Is Associated with Progression to Invasive Cancer and Is a Negative Prognostic Factor in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinomas Am. J. Pathol., August 1, 2002; 161(2): 365 - 371. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M J Schurter, D P LeBrun, and K J Harrison Improved technique for fluorescence in situ hybridisation analysis of isolated nuclei from archival, B5 or formalin fixed, paraffin wax embedded tissue Mol. Pathol., April 1, 2002; 55(2): 121 - 124. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Shah, N. R. Mucci, A. Amin, J. A. Macoska, and M. A. Rubin Postatrophic Hyperplasia of the Prostate Gland : Neoplastic Precursor or Innocent Bystander? Am. J. Pathol., May 1, 2001; 158(5): 1767 - 1773. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J Nicholson, C Wickramasinghe, F Ross, J Crolla, and D Ellison Imbalances of chromosome 17 in medulloblastomas determined by comparative genomic hybridisation and fluorescence in situ hybridisation Mol. Pathol., December 1, 2000; 53(6): 313 - 319. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				I. A. Sokolova, K. C. Halling, R. B. Jenkins, H. M. Burkhardt, R. G. Meyer, S. A. Seelig, and W. King The Development of a Multitarget, Multicolor Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization Assay for the Detection of Urothelial Carcinoma in Urine J. Mol. Diagn., August 1, 2000; 2(3): 116 - 123. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				L. Bubendorf, J. Kononen, P. Koivisto, P. Schraml, H. Moch, T. C. Gasser, N. Willi, M. J. Mihatsch, G. Sauter, and O.-P. Kallioniemi Survey of Gene Amplifications during Prostate Cancer Progression by High-Throughput Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization on Tissue Microarrays Cancer Res., February 1, 1999; 59(4): 803 - 806. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]