 |
 |
 |
 |
CONSENSUS REPORT OF THE ESACP TASK FORCE ON
STANDARDIZATION OF DIAGNOSTIC DNA IMAGE CYTOMETRY
A. Böcking1, F. Giroud2, A. Reith3
1 A.Böcking, M.D., Institute of Cytopathology, Heinrich
Heine University Düsseldorf, Germany
2 F.Giroud, Ph.D., Laboratoire RFMQ Universite Joseph
Fourier, Grenoble, France
3 A.Reith, M.D., The Norwegian Radium Hospital and Institute of
Cancer Research, Dept. of Pathology. Montebello, Oslo,
Norway
Address for reprints: Prof. Dr. Alfred Böcking, Institute of Cytopathology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, P.O.Box 101 007, D - 40001 Düsseldorf, Germany
The following topics were agreed upon at the meeting of the above mentioned task force durinq the third conference of the ESACP, Grenoble, May 17th, 1994
This report refers to quantitative assessment of nuclear DNA by photometric methods on cytological material.
I. Biological background
Cytometric quantitation of nuclear DNA content is increasingly
coming into practice for assistance in the diagnosis and
grading of malignant tumors.
The quantity of nuclear DNA may be changed by the following mechanisms: replication, polyploidization, gain or deletion. Each affects the size or the number of chromatids. Furthermore gene amplification and viral infections may change nuclear DNA content in the limits of the resolution of flow- and image cytometry.
Among others, the unspecific effects of cytostatic therapy, radiation therapy, vitamin B12 deficiency, apoptosis, autolysis and necrosis on nuclear DNA content have to be taken into consideration when a diaanostic interpretation of DNA histograms is performed.
References: Böhm and Sandritter, 1975; Winkler et al., 1984; Tribukait et al., 1986; Shackney et al., 1990: Sandberg, 1990; Biesterfeld et al., 1994; Böcking et al.. 1994
II. Nomenclature to designate nuclear DNA measurements The grammalogues "ICM-DNA" (DNA measured by image cytometry) and "FCM-DNA" (DNA measured by flow cytometry) should be used to designate the type of nuclear DNA measurements.
III. Preparation of cytological specimens
1. Samples
Cell culture monolayers, imprints (touch preparations), smears
from fine needle aspiration biopsies (FNAB), smears from
exfoliated cells, cytocentrifuged preparations from body
fluids, cell separation specimens (after mechanic and/or
enzymatic dispersion) from FNABs, core- or other biopsies or
from formaldehyde-fixed, paraffin embedded tissues may be
used.
References:
Delgado et al., 1984; Hedley et al., 1985; Tutuarima et al.,
1988; de Launoit et al., 1990; Heiden et al., 1991; Howat et
al., 1992; Hutchinson et al., 1992; Geyer et al., 1993
2. Fixation
Fixation with formaldehyde is necessary before staining for
Feulgen with pararosaniline or thionine. One possible
procedure is to air dry the samples at room temperature for at
least one hour. Then fix in 4% paraformaldehyde during 30
minutes and rinse in distilled water [4% paraformaldehyde = 4%
(weight/vol) paraformaldehyde: 4 g polyoxymethylen in 100 Vol
PBS (pH = 7,2) - heat to 70oC - cool to room temperature -
filter].
Prestained smears may also be used. Postfixation after uncovering is recommended accordina to the above mentioned procedure.
References:
Kotelnikow and Litinskaya, 1981; Baak, 1989; Giroud and
Montmasson. 1989; de Launoit et al., 1990; Munck-Wikland et
al., 1990; Aubele et al., 1994
3. Staining
Staining by the Feulgen reaction is recommended. Hydrolysis
conditions for Feulgen have to take tissue type, fixation
(time and concentration) and mode of preparation into account.
Optimal staining conditions have to be worked out, based on
hydrolysis curves (time vs IOD = integrated optical density).
Hydrolysis has to be performed under controlled temperature
and time conditions.
The following conditions are suitable for many routine
applications: 5 M HCI, 25oC and 1 hour. Stop hydrolysis by
rinsing in distilled water. Use Schiff reagent [pararosaniline
(red) or thionine (blue)] during 1 hour. Check, that covered
surfaces of slides are correctly exposed to reagents. Sulfite
rinse to remove surplus dye from the cell nuclei and
cytoplasm.
====== Absorpt. =Color Index =Color Index =Chem.Abstr.
==Dye= Maximum == Name == == Number == == Number
Pararos-
aniline= 560 nm =basic red 9 =42500 =569-61-9
Thionine 590 nm =no C.I.name =52000 =78338-22-4
Commercial Schiffs reagent is often prepared from basic fuchsine which is a dye mixture of relatives of pararosaniline. The limit of shelf life of pararosaniline and thionine solutions is about one year and two weeks respectively.
Specificity control of the Feulgen reaction may be performed by staining an unhydrolysed specimen which must remain unstained.
Fluorochromes may also be used for DNA staining and subsequent measurements of fluorescence intensities.
References:
Feulgen and Rossenbeck, 1924; Graumann, 1953; van Duijn, 1956;
Kjellstrand, 1977; Larson and Sanaia, 1980; Krug, 1980;
Schulte, 1986; Chatelain et al., 1989; Schulte and Wittekind,
1990, a/b; Schulte, 1991: Mikel and Becker. 1991: Lyon et al.
1992
IV. Instrumentation requirements for densitometric
measurements
Setting up the system:
1. Use different interference filters for blue (thionine, e.g.
590 +- 10 nm) or red (pararosaniline, e.g. 560 +-10 nm).
2. Köhler illumination.
3. Analogue and digital adjustment.
System quality assurance:
4. Check stability over time.
5. Check densitometric linearity
(e.g. using set of neutral glasses of defined transmissions).
6. Check for shading phenomena.
7. Check for glare phenomena.
References:
Echsner and Schreiber, 1962; Goldstein 1970; Bedi and
Goldstein, 1976; Djuindam et al., 1980; Krug, 1980; Jarvis,
1986; Sanchez et al., 1990; Mikel and Becker, 1991; Kindermann
and Hilgers, 1994; Cieco et al.. 1994. Reith and Danielsen,
1994
V. Densitometric measurements
1. Nuclei to be measured should be in focus. In automated
systems, check on the image gallery after measurement.
2. No change of instrumentation adjustment during measurements
(Köhler-illumination, analogue and digital adjustment).
3. Correct for shading by software procedures.
4. Correct for local background per nucleus by software
procedures.
5. Correct for glare (= straylight) by software procedures.
6. Use visual control during and/or after measurements for
artefact rejection and appropriate segmentation.
7. Check linearity of IOD values (2c, 4c, 8c), for example
using cerebellum cells or rat liver hepatocytes.
VI. Reference cells
1. Reference cells are necessary for DNA scaling of
densitometric measurements.
2. Use internal and/or external references. Lymphocytes,
granulocytes, normal epithelial cells or stroma cells are
usually analysed as internal standards. Rat liver 2c
hepatocytes may be used as external standard.
3. Reference cells should be prepared and fixed identically as
cells under analysis.
4. Reference cells should be stained in the same staining bath
as the sample.
5. Reference cells should be analysed during the same run as
the sample and under the same conditions.
6. The CV of the reference cell population should not exceed
6% (coefficient of variation = standard deviation ./. mean x
100).
References:
Tribukait et al., 1975; Munck-Wikland et al., 1990; Coen et
al., 1992
VII. Scaling procedure
1. Use reference cells to transform the arbitrary unit scale
(a.u.) in a reference unit scale (2c, 4c, 8c for example).
2. Make estimation of DNA measurement variations between the
reference cells used and the diploid cells of the tissue under
study and define a correction factor if necessary. Give
standard deviation of correction factor.
3. Apply the corrective factor to DNA measurements from the
sample before DNA histogram interpretation.
VIII. Performance standards
1. For measurements of one diploid cell at 30 different sites
of the digitized field a CV of IOD values c 3% is an
acceptable value under routine measurement conditions.
2. For measurements of a non dividing diploid cell population
(n = 30, e.g. Iymphocytes, granulocytes) at 30 different sites
of the digitized field a CV of iOD values < 5% is an
acceptable value.
3. Median IOD values of G0/G1-phase fractions of diploid cell
types differing in nuclear size (at least 3 classes) should
not differ more than 5% (e.g. granulocytes, myelocytes and
erythroblasts from human bone marrow).
IX. Sampling validity and representativity
The number of suspicous or neoplastic cells to be measured
depends on the type of histogram (number of peaks) and on the
area of application.
X. Diagnostic and prognostic interpretation of DNA histograms
Simple and complex algorithms or classification strategies for
histogram interpretation may be used for three purposes,
depending on the material under investigation and the
diagnostic or clinical questions:
1. diagnosis of neoplasia
2. prognostication of neoplasia
3. therapy planning of neoplasia.
The results of some of these algorithms depend on
the number of histogram classes. Histogram classifications
should not be based on subiective interpretations but be
defined by algorithms:
The following algorithms and classifications may serve as
examples.
DI DNA Index of Stemline (Hiddeman et al., 1984)
SLP Stemline ploidy (Böhm and Sandritter, 1975; Sandritter
and Carl, 1966; Kropff et al., 1 991 )
xER Rates of cells exceeding certain thresholds
(x = e.g. 2,5c, 5c, 9c) (Böcking et al., 1984; Chatelain
et al., 1989)
xEE Number of cells per specimen exceeding certain thresholds
(x = e.g. 2,5c, 5c, 9c) (Ploem-Zaaijer et al. 1979;
Böcking, 1990, Böcking et al., 1993)
2cDI 2c Deviation Index (Böcking et al., 1984)
SSG Stemline shoulder fraction (Kropff et al., 1991 )
Complex Algorithms:
DE Distribution Entropy (Stenkvist and Strande, 1990)
DNA-MG DNA Malignancy Grade (Böcking and Auffermann,
1986)
PB Ploidy Balance (Opfermann et al., 1987)
SLA Stemline Aneuploidy (Böcking et al., 1994)
AEd/t Aneuploid events diploid/tetraploid (Böcking et al.,1994)
DNA/RI DNA regression index (Böcking et al., 1985)
Classifications:
Albe et al. (1990): Colon
Tribukait et al. (1983): Prostate
Böcking et al. (1994): Kidney
Forsslund and Zetterberg (1990): Prostate
XI.References
1. Albe Y, Vassilakos P, Helfer-Guarnori K, Givel JC, deQuay
N, Suardet L, Eliason JF, Odartchenko N. Independent
prognostic value of ploidy in colorectal cancer. Cancer 1990;
66:1168- 1175.
2. Aubele M, Burger G, Rodenacker K. Problems concerning
quality of Feulgen DNA measurements: a study on five different
fixation techniques. Analyt Quant Cytol.Histol 1994;in press.
3. Baak JPA, Noteboom E, Koevoets JJM. The influence of
fixatives and other variations in tissue processing on nuclear
morphometric features. Analyt Quant Cytol Histol 1989; 11
:219-224.
4. Bedi KS, Goldstein DY. Apparent anomalities in nuclear
Feulgen-DNA contents. Role of systematic densitometric error.
J Cell Biol 1976;71 :6-88.
5. Biesterfeld S, Gerres K, Fischer-Wein G, Böcking A.
Polyploidy in non-neoplastic tissues. J Clin Pathol
1994;47:38-42.
6. Böcking A. DNA-Zytometrie und Automation in der klinischen
Diagnostik. Beitr.Onkol 1990;38:298-347.
7. Böcking A, Adler CP, Common HH, Hilgarth Hm Granzen B,
Auffermann W. Algorithm for a DNA cytophotometric diagnosis
and grading of malignancy. Analyt Quant Cytol 1984;6: 1 -8.
8. Böcking A, Auffermann W. Algorithm for DNA cytophotometric
diagnosis and grading of malignancy. Analyt Quant Cytol
1986;8:363.
9. Böcking A, Biesterfeld S, Liu S. DNA distribution in
gastric cancer and dysplasia. In: Zhang, Kawai, eds.
Precancerous conditions and lesions of the stomach. Springer
Verlag, Heidelberg, 1993:103-120.
10. Böcking A, Striepecke E, Auer H, Fuzesi L. Static DNA
cytometry. Biological background, technique and diagnostic
interpretation. In: Wied GL, Bartels PH, Rosenthal DL, Schenck
U (eds.): Compendium on the Computerized Cytology and
Histology Laboratory. Tutorials of Cytology, Chicago,
Illinois, USA, pp 107-128,1994.
11. Böcking A, Striepecke E, Fuzesi L. Cytogenetic and
cell-kinetic basis of diagnostic DNA cytometry. Verh Dtsch Ges
Path 1994;78.
12. Böhm N, Sandritter W. DNA in human tumors: a
cytophotometric study. SpringerVerlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New
York, 1975.
13. Chatelain R, Schunck T, Schindler E, Schindler A, Böcking
A. Diagnosis of prospective malignancy in koilocytic
dysplasias of the cervix with DNA cytometry. J Reprod Med
1989: 505-510.
14. Chatelain R, Willms A, Biesterfeld S, Auffermann W,
Böcking A. Automated Feulgen staining with a
temperature-controlled staining machine. Analyt Quant Cytol
Histol 1989; 11 :211 -217.
15. Chieco P, Jonker A, Melchiorri C, Vanni G, van Noorden
CJF. A user's guide for avoiding errors in absorbance image
cytometry: a review with original experimental observations.
Histochem J 1994;26:1-19.
16. Coen H, Pauwels M, Roels F. The rat liver cell nuclear
imprint as a standard for DNA measurements. Analyt Cell Pathol
1992;4:273-285.
17. Delgado R. Mikuz G, Hofstädter F. DNA Feulgen
cytophotometric analysis of single cells isolated from
paraffin embedded tissue. Path Res Pract 1984;179:9294.
18. van Duijn P. A histochemical specific thionine-SO2 reagent
and its use in a bicolor method for deoxyribonucleic acid and
periodic acid-Schiff positive substances. J Histochem Cytochem
1956;4:55-63.
19. Duijndam WAL, Smeulders AWM, van Duijn P, Verweij AC.
Optical errors in scanning stage absorbance cytophotometry. l.
Procedures for correcting apparent integrated absorbance
values for distributional glare and diffraction errors. J
Histochem Cytochem 1980;28:388-394.
20. Echsner G, Schreiber W. Zur Bestimmung des
Falschlichtanteils. In: Optik und Spektroskopie aller
Wellenlangen. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1962.
21. Feulgen R, Rossenbeck H. Mikroskopisch-chemischer Nachweis
einer Nucleinsaure vom Typus der Thymonucleinsäure und die
darauf beruhende elektive Färbung von Zellkernen in
mikroskopischen Praparaten. Hoppe Seyler Z Physiol Chem
1924:135 :203-248.
22. Forsslund G, Zetterberg A. Ploidy level determination in
high-grade and low-grade malignant variants of prostatic
carcinoma. Cancer Res 1990;50:4281-4285.
23. Geyer JW, Hancock F, Carrico C, Kirkpatrick J. Preliminary
evaluation of CytoRich: an improved automated cytology
preparation. Diagn Cytopathol 1993;9:417-422.
24. Giroud F, Montmasson MP. Reevaluation of optimal Feulgen
reaction for automated cytology: influences of fixations.
Analyt Quant Cytol Histol 1989;11:87-95.
25. Goldstein GJ. Aspects of scanning microdensitometry. I.
Stray light (glare). J Microscop 1970;92: 1 - 16.
26. Graumann W. Zur Standardisierung des Schiff'schen Reagenz.
Z Wiss Mikros 1953;61 :225-226.
27. Hedley DW, Friedlander M, Taylor TW. Application of DNA
flow cytometry to paraffin-embedded archival material for the
study of aneuploidy and its clinical significance. Cytometry
1985;6:327-333.
28. Heiden T, Wang H, Tribukait B. An improved Hedley-method
for preparation of paraffin-embedded tissues for flow
cytometric anaiysis of ploidy and S-phase. Cytometry 1991;
12:614-621.
29. Hiddemann W, Schumann J, Andreef M, Barlogie B, Herman CJ,
Leif RC, Mayall BH, Murphy RF, Sandberg AA. Convention on
nomenclature for DNA cytometry. Cancer Genetics and
Cytogenetics 1984; 13: 181 - 183.
30. Howat AJ, Armstrong GR, Briggs WA, Nicholson CM, Stewart
DJ. Fine needle aspiration of palpable breast lumps: a 1-year
audit using the Cytospin method. Cvtopathology 1992;3: 17-22.
31. Hutchinson ML, Agarwal P, Denault T, Berger B, Cibas ES. A
new look at cervical cytology. ThinPrep Multicenter Trial
results. Acta Cytol 1992;36:499-504.
32. Jarvis JR. A microcomputer system for video image analysis
and diagnostic microdensitometry. Analyt Quant Cytol Histol
1986;8:201-209.
33. Kindermann D, Hilgers CH. Glare correction in DNA image
cytometry. Analyt cell Path 1994:6:165-180.
34. Kjellstrand P. Temperature and acid concentration in the
search for optimum Feulqen hydrolysis conditions. J Histochem
Cytochem 1977;25:129-134.
35. Kotelnikov VM, Litinskaya LL. Comparative studies of
Feulgen hydrolysis for DNA. 1. Influence of different
fixatives and polyethylene glycols. Histochem 1981:71
:145-143.
36. Kropff M, Chatelain R, Muller CP, Wagner A, Wenzler T,
Bohmer H, Böcking A. Monitoring DNA cytometric parameters
during the course of chronic myelogenous leukemia. Analyt
Quant Cytol Histol 1991;13:433-439.
37. Krug A. Histo- und Zytophotometrie. VEB Gustav
Fischer-Verlag, Jena, 1980.
38. Larson MLP, Sanaia H. The Feulgen reaction: importance of
the wash after hydrolysis. Acta Histochem 1980;67:6-12.
39. de Launoit Y, Kiss R, Ganguy A. Influence of smear
preparation and fixatives on the ploidy and the morphonuclear
features of the MXT-mammary tumor and normal tissues in the
mouse. Cytometry 1990;11:691-699.
40. Lyon H, Schulte E, de Leenherr B et al.
ECCLS-SRMTS-standards on dyes and stains. ll. Thionine.
Histochem J 1992;24:228-229.
41. Mikel UV, Becker RL. A comparative study of quantitative
stains for DNA in image cytometry. Analyt Quant Cytol Histol
1991;13:253-260.
42. Munck-Wikland E, Rubiro CA, Auer GU, Kuylenstierna R,
Lindham J. Control cells for image cytometric DNA analysis of
esophageal tissue and the influence of preoperative treatment.
Analyt Quant Cytol Histol 1990;12:267-274.
43. Opfermann M, Brugal G, Vassilakow P. Cytometric of breast
carcinoma: significance of ploidy balance and proliferation
index. Cytometry 1987;8:217-224.
44. Ploem-Zaaijer JJ, Beyer-Boon ME, Leyte-Veldstra L, Ploem
JS. Cytofluorometric and cytophotometric DNA measurements of
cervical smears stained using a new bicolor method. In:
Pressmann NJ, Wied GL, eds. Automation of cancer cytology and
cell image analysis. Tutorials of cytology, Chicago,
1979:225-235
45. Reith A, Danielsen H. Assessment of DNA-ploidy in tumor
material. Preparation and measurement by image cytometry. In:
Wied GL, Bartels PH, Rosenthal DL, Schenck U, eds. Compendium
on the computerized cytology and histology laboratory.
Tutorials of Cytology, Chicago, Illinois, USA, pp 185-193,
1994.
46. Sandberg AA. The chromosomes in human cancer and leukemia.
Second Edition. Elsevier, New York, Amsterdam, Oxford, 1990.
47. Sanchez L, Regh M, Biesterfeld S, Chatelain R, Böcking A.
Performance of a TV image analysis system as a
microdensitometer. Analyt Quant Cytol Histol 1990; 12:279-284.
48. Sandritter W, Carl M. Cytophotometric measurements of the
DNA content (Feulgen reaction) of malignant human tumors. Acta
Cytol 1966;10:26-30.
49. Schenck U, Jütting U. Histogram features based on DNA
values weighted by sinus functions. Analyt Quant Cytol Histol
1994;16:70.
50. Schulte E. Air drying as a preparatory factor in cytology:
Investigation of its influence on dye uptake and dye binding.
Diagn Cytopathol 1986;2:160-167.
51. Schulte E. Standardization on the Feulgen reaction for
absorption. DNA image cytometry: A review. Analyt Cell Pathol
1991;3:167-182.
52. Schulte E, Wittekind D. Standardization of the Feulgen
reaction: The influence of chromatin condensations on the
kinetics of acid hydrolysis. Analyt Cell Pathol
1990;2:149-157.
53. Schulte E, Wittekind D. Standardization of the Papanicolaou
stain. 1. A comparison of five nuclear stains. Analyt Quant
Cytol Histol 1990;12:149-156.
54. Shackney SE, Burholt DR, Pollice AA, Smith CA, Pugh RP,
Hartsock J. Discrepancies between flow cytometric and
cytogenetic studies in the detection of aneuploidy in human
solid tumors. Cytometry 1990;11:94-104.
55. Stenkvist B, Strande G. Entropy as an algorithm for the
statistical description of DNA cytometric data obtained by
image analysis microscopy. Analyt Cell Path 1990;2: 159-165.
56. Tribukait B, Ronstrom L, Esposti PL. Quantitative and
qualitative aspects of flow DNA measurements reiated to the
cytologic grade in prostatic carcinoma. Analyt Quant Cytol
1983;5: 107-111.
57. Tribukait B, Granberg-Ohmann I, Wijkstrom H. Flow
cytometric DNA and cytogenetic studies in human tumors: a
comparison and discussion of the differences in modal values
obtained by the two methods. Cytometry 1986;7:194-199.
58. Tribukait B, Moberger G, Zetterberg A. Methodological
aspects for rapid flow cytofluorometry for DNA analysis of
human urinary bladder cells. In: Haenen C, Hillen H, Wessels
S, eds. Pulse cytophotometry, part 1. European Press Medicon,
Ghent; 1975:55-60.
59. Tutuarima JA, Hische EAH, Sylva-Steenland RMR, van der Helm
HJ. A cytopreparatory method for cerebrospinal fluid in which
the cell yield is high and the fluid is saved for chemical
analysis. Acta Cytol 1988;32:425.
60. Winkler B, Crum C, Fujii T, Ferenczy A, Boon M, Braun L,
Lancaster WD, Richart RM. Koilocytic lesions in the cervix.
Cancer 1984;53: 1081 -1087.
XII. List of Task Force Participants
T. Agorastos, Thessaloniki
Y. Albe, Geneve
M. Aubele, München
J. Baak, Amsterdam
J. Belien, Amsterdam
A. Böcking, Aachen
Y. Collan, Turku
H.E. Danielsen, Oslo
R. Giardini, Milano
J.-D. D'Hautcourt, Mons
I. Ellis, Nottingham
U. Falkmer, Stockholm
G. Feichter, Basel
O. Ferrer-Roca, Teneriffe
F. Giroud, Grenoble
A. Hanselaar, Nijmegen
G. Haroske, München
M. Hubler, Basel
U. Jütting, München
K. Kayser, Heidelberg
T. Kuopio, Turku
N. Maoynis, Athens
S. Markidou, Athens
W. Meyer, Dresden
A. Reith, Oslo
K. Rodenacker, München
U. Schenck, München
E. Schulte, Mainz
D. Seigneurin, Grenoble
B. Stenkvist, Stockholm
F. Theissig, Dresden
E. Thunissen, Maastricht
B. Tribukait, Stockholm
XIII. Addendum
The above ESACP Report is based on preceeding activities
during the Second and Third International Conferences on the
Computerized Cytology and Histology Laboratory, Chicago, March
8-11, 1992 und March 6-9, 1994.
In 1992 a Task Force on Standardization of Quantitative Methods in Diagnostic Pathology has discussed under the guidance of Dorothy Rosenthal:
Group 1 on Specimen Characteristics developed recommendations on specimen types and preparation, fixation methods, staining methods and controls. These were limited to quantitative DNA analysis for clinical application using slide-based (microscopic) image analysis. Participants were: Robert L. Becker, Thomas Gahm, Klaus Kayser (coordinator), Ulrika v. Mikel, Sonya Naryshkin, Peter S. Oud, Noboru Tanaka and Rosemary E. Zuna.
Group 2 on Instrumentation contributed data acquisition standards (optical system requirements and photometric standards), standards for data computed from images, software and editorial standards, all relevant for DNA image cytometry. Participants were: Peter H. Bartels, Daniel F. Cowan (coordinator), Harvey E. Dytch, Lawrence L. Hause, Manuel Hilgarth, Robert S. Ledley, Martin Oberholzer, Johan S. Ploem, George L. Wied and David J. Zahniser.
Group 3 on Biology-Gynecology dealt with the possible application of diagnostic DNA measurements in neoplastic lesions of the uterine cervix, ovary and endometrium. Participants were: Mariuce Bibbo, Ton A.G.J.M. Hanselaar, Martha L. Hutchinson (coordinator), Toshihiko Izutsu, Leopold Koss, Iwao Nishiya, Ralph M. Richard and G. Peter Vooijs.
Group 4 on Nongynecologic Tumors elaborated recommendations concerning the clinical usefulness of DNA measuarements in diagnostic cyto- and histopathology in nongynecologic tumors. Participants were: Alfred B_cking (coordinator), Kenney W. Gilchrist, Gianmario Mariuzzi, Ulrich Schenck and Alain Verhest.
Final agreements could not be achieved on the drafts which were prepared during the sessions of the respective Task Force groups.
In March 1994 at the Third Conference on Computerised Cytology and Histology Laboratory in Chicago a Task Force on DNA Standardisation was coordinated by Albrecht Reith. Topics addressed were: Biological background, preparation (samples, fixation, staining), instrumentation requirements (including performance standards and measurements), calibration and diagnostic interpretation.
Members of the editorial committee for the final draft were: Daniel F. Beals, Alfred Bocking, Harvard E. Danielsen, Robert C. Leif, Ulrich Schenck and Albrecht Reith (coordinator) .
Much agreement on the outlines of the concept of DNA standardisation was achieved and founded the structure and basic components of the above ESACP Consensus Report conceived in May 1994 in Grenoble at the 3rd ESACP conference.
Alfred Böcking, Albrecht Reith
|
|
|
|