Display options
Cite
Jenner K, Darnton SJ, Billingham L, et al. Tumour heterogeneity: a problem in biopsy assessment of the proliferation index of oesophageal adenocarcinomas. Clin Mol Pathol. 1996;49(1):M61-3doi: 10.1136/mp.49.1.m61.
Jenner, K., Darnton, S. J., Billingham, L., Warfield, A. T., & Matthews, H. R. (1996). Tumour heterogeneity: a problem in biopsy assessment of the proliferation index of oesophageal adenocarcinomas. Clinical molecular pathology, 49(1), M61-3. https://doi.org/10.1136/mp.49.1.m61
Jenner, K, et al. "Tumour heterogeneity: a problem in biopsy assessment of the proliferation index of oesophageal adenocarcinomas." Clinical molecular pathology vol. 49,1 (1996): M61-3. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/mp.49.1.m61
Jenner K, Darnton SJ, Billingham L, Warfield AT, Matthews HR. Tumour heterogeneity: a problem in biopsy assessment of the proliferation index of oesophageal adenocarcinomas. Clin Mol Pathol. 1996 Feb;49(1):M61-3. doi: 10.1136/mp.49.1.m61. PMID: 16696048; PMCID: PMC408021.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Clin Mol Pathol. 1996 Feb;49(1):M61-3. doi: 10.1136/mp.49.1.m61.

Tumour heterogeneity: a problem in biopsy assessment of the proliferation index of oesophageal adenocarcinomas.

Clinical molecular pathology

K Jenner, S J Darnton, L Billingham, A T Warfield, H R Matthews

Affiliations

  1. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Birmingham Heartlands Hospital, Birmingham B9 5SS.

PMID: 16696048 PMCID: PMC408021 DOI: 10.1136/mp.49.1.m61

Abstract

Tumour heterogeneity may pose a problem when biopsy specimens are taken to measure proliferation (for example, in assessing response to therapy). Two "biopsy specimens" were taken from the centre and two from the edge of the luminal surface of 20 resected oesophageal adenocarcinomas. The proliferation index for each "biopsy specimen" was measured by counting Ki67 labelled nuclei in histological sections. The proliferation index was not associated with tumour differentiation or stage. There was site specific heterogeneity with a significant difference in proliferation index between the central (mean (SD) 36.4 (9.7)) and edge "biopsy specimens" (39.3 (9.9)). There was, however, a wide range of differences between pairs of "biopsy specimens" from both sites. In conclusion, if a tumour is to be sampled for measurement of the proliferation index before and after treatment, then the sequential biopsy specimens (preferably duplicated on each occasion) should be taken consistently from a leading edge of the lesion.

References

  1. Int J Cancer. 1991 Mar 12;47(5):686-91 - PubMed
  2. J Pathol. 1990 Jun;161(2):113-8 - PubMed
  3. J Clin Pathol. 1990 Mar;43(3):184-92 - PubMed
  4. J Immunol. 1984 Oct;133(4):1710-5 - PubMed

Publication Types