4.6 Article

DNA-flow cytometry of 207 pituitary adenomas: Ploidy, proliferation, and prognosis

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENDOCRINOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION
Volume 28, Issue 9, Pages 795-801

Publisher

EDITRICE KURTIS S R L
DOI: 10.1007/BF03347568

Keywords

flow cytometry; pituitary adenoma; somatostatin analogs; dopamine agonists; proliferation parameters

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The principal factors involved in pituitary adenoma formation are unknown. DNA flow cytometry is a useful study providing an estimation of a tumor proliferative rate. In this study, DNA-flow cytometry was performed to evaluate its capability to both assess prognosis and predict recurrence. Two hundred and seven fresh pituitary adenoma specimens were assessed by flow cytometry. Pre-operative endocrine function, previous medical treatment, radiographic appearance, surgical findings and immunohistochemistry were recorded for each patient. Patient outcomes were assessed at a mean follow-up of 5.3 +/- 3.1 yr. Endocrinologically inactive pituitary adenomas were predominantly euploids (50.8%). The highest proliferation rates occurred in Nelson's syndrome and the lowest in Cushing's disease. A significant difference in proliferation was observed with prolactinomas and acromegaly when a medical treatment was performed before primary surgery. Massive histological invasiveness was directly associated with a significant increase in proliferation rate. Radiotherapy did not affect the recurrence rate (4.4%) statistically. In conclusion, DNA-flow cytometry was found to be useful for determining ploidy and obtaining an overview of cell cycle status. It was helpful in identifying patients requiring closer follow-up, such as those with invasive adenomas and Nelson's syndrome. No single parameter revealed by DNA-flow cytometry could predict tumor prognosis or recurrence in the follow-up of 7.5 +/- 1.3 yr.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available