Relationship between potential doubling time (Tpot), labeling index and duration of DNA synthesis in 60 esophageal and 35 breast tumors:: is it worthwhile to measure Tpot?

被引:34
作者
Haustermans, K
Fowler, J
Geboes, K
Christiaens, MR
Lerut, A
van der Schueren, E
机构
[1] UZ Gasthuisberg, Dept Radiotherapy, Louvain, Belgium
[2] UZ Gasthuisberg, Dept Pathol, Louvain, Belgium
[3] UZ Gasthuisberg, Dept Breast Surg, Louvain, Belgium
[4] UZ Gasthuisberg, Dept Thorac Surg, Louvain, Belgium
关键词
esophageal tumors; breast tumors; proliferation; labeling index; potential doubling time; flow cytometry;
D O I
10.1016/S0167-8140(97)00164-3
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
zdBackground: In recent years T-pot (potential doubling time) has been measured before treatment in human tumors in an attempt to estimate the proliferation taking place during a course of irradiation. T-pot is defined as T-s/LI, where T-s is the duration of DNA synthesis and LI is the labeling index (proportion of cells synthesizing DNA). T-s is more difficult to measure than LI, so the question arises whether variation introduced during the determination of T-s is compensated by the theoretically better relevance of the quotient T-pot than of LI alone. It is not clear from comparisons with clinical outcome whether T-pot is a useful indicator of proliferation or whether LI is more prognostic, as suggested by a currently ongoing multicenter analysis elsewhere. Therefore, we investigated intercomparisons between T-pot and its components LI and T-s in two in their proliferation rates contrasting types of tumor where multiple biopsies were taken from each tumor. Materials and methods: Sixty patients with esophageal carcinoma and 57 patients with breast cancer were included in this study. All patients were injected with IUdR 6-8 h before surgery. From each tumor three to five biopsies were taken at surgery. Using flow cytometry, LI and T-s were measured on all biopsies in order to calculate T-pot. Logarithmic transformations of the distributions were used to examine correlations. Kappa-tests were used to assess how reliable an LI value could be in predicting the corresponding T-pot. Results: T-s and LI were not completely independent, based on the within-tumor coefficients of variation (CVw). The ratio of between-tumor coefficient of variation (CVb) to the CVw suggested that the discriminative power of T-pot was higher than LI for esophagus, but the reverse in breast tumors, which had a larger range. Pearson correlation coefficients were high for log T-pot versus log LI in both types of tumor, but the predictive power was low, as shown by kappa-values of only 0.3-0.41 starting with LI and trying to predict the corresponding value of T-pot. Increasing widths of a central 'gray zone' were investigated for improved discrimination between fast and slow proliferation. Multiples of the within-tumor standard deviation, equally on each side of the median, were used to vary the width of the gray zone. Without a gray zone no more than 70% successful matching was obtained in esophagus tumors, compared with 80% in breast tumors. However, by excluding about half of the esophageal tumors an 80% success rate was achieved. In breast tumors over 90% matching was obtained more easily, keeping 80% of the tumors classifiable. For both tumor types correlations between T-s and T-pot were weak, with a trend towards short T-s associated with short T-pot and also with low LI. The latter correlation was significant for esophageal tumors and resulted in T-pot values having a smaller range than the LIs. Conclusion: Although there were good correlation coefficients between T-pot and LI, the predictive power of either from the other was not reliable, except by excluding a significant number of tumors close to the medians. The predictive value of LI for T-pot was higher for breast tumors because the spread in cell kinetic measurements was wide. Until more clinical data become available on outcome in comparison with LI or T-pot, it is Still worthwhile to measure T-pot and to assess the prognostic value of both LI and T-pot in relation to outcome. (C) 1998 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:157 / 167
页数:11
相关论文
共 49 条
[1]  
Altman D, 1991, PRACTICAL STAT MED R, P404
[2]  
[Anonymous], SIGNAL DETECTION REC
[3]  
AWWAD HK, 1994, INT CANC C DEC
[4]  
AWWAD HK, 1992, SEMIN RADIAT ONCOL, V2, P62
[5]   A METHOD TO MEASURE THE DURATION OF DNA-SYNTHESIS AND THE POTENTIAL DOUBLING TIME FROM A SINGLE SAMPLE [J].
BEGG, AC ;
MCNALLY, NJ ;
SHRIEVE, DC ;
KARCHER, H .
CYTOMETRY, 1985, 6 (06) :620-626
[6]  
BEGG AC, 1995, ECCO M PAR
[7]  
BEGG AC, 1992, SEMIN RADIAT ONCOL, V2, P22
[8]   OVERALL TREATMENT TIME AND TUMOR-CONTROL DOSE FOR HEAD AND NECK TUMORS - THE DOG LEG REVISITED [J].
BENTZEN, SM ;
THAMES, HD .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 1992, 25 (02) :143-144
[9]   STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) :307-310
[10]  
BONNADONNA G, 1986, NATL CANCER I MONOGR, V1, P45