How should PCNA be assessed? Total of stained cells or only the most intensely stained ones?
How should PCNA be assessed? Total of stained cells or only the most intensely stained ones?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1590/s1516-31801998000200005
复制
发表时间：
1998-03-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
de Carvalho, F M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kemp, C;Alberti, V N;de Carvalho, F M
目的：分析增殖活性标记物(PCNA)能否作为判断肿瘤进展的指标，以及不同的解释标准是否会改变这一结果。方法：检测59例状态II(T2，N0.1，M0)乳腺癌组织中增殖细胞核抗原的表达。将这些数据与解剖病理参数进行比较。在较高的细胞周期素值与较差的组织学和核分级之间存在显著的相关性，特别是在使用增殖细胞核抗原指数的“腋窝阴性”患者中。结论：细胞核(NG3)和组织学(HGIII)分级越高，增殖细胞核抗原指数(>；50)越高，就越能区分高危患者，将所有染色细胞作为增殖细胞核抗原指数的代表更为合适，从而反映了肿瘤的侵袭性。
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyse whether a marker of proliferative activity (PCNA) could provide a prognosis of tumor evolution and to determine whether different interpretation criteria could alter the results.METHOD: The presence of PCNA in 59 patients of state II (T2 N0.1 M0) mammary carcinoma was determined.RESULT: Numerical proportions of total and intensely stained cells were established. These data were compared with anatomopathological parameters. A significant association between higher cyclin values and worse histological and nuclear grading was encountered, particularly in patients with a "negative axilla" using the PCNA index. Cyclin values were not significant in relation to any parameters when indices from the intensely stained cells were considered exclusively.CONCLUSION: Higher nuclear (NG3) and histological (HGIII) grading, associated with a high PCNA index (> 50), distinguish high-risk patients, and it is more appropriate considering all the stained cells as representative of PCNA indices, thus reflecting tumor aggressiveness.