Revisiting tumour aneuploidy-the place of ploidy assessment in the molecular era

Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology

Volumn 13, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 291-304

  Danielsen, Håvard E ^a   Pradhan, Manohar ^a   Novelli, Marco ^b  

^a OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON HOSPITALS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CELL DNA; TUMOR MARKER; DNA;

ANEUPLOIDY; BARRETT ESOPHAGUS; BLADDER CARCINOMA; BREAST CANCER; CANCER GENETICS; CANCER GRADING; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; CANCER TISSUE; COLON CANCER; COLORECTAL CANCER; CYTOMETRY; DNA CYTOMETRY; DNA DETERMINATION; DNA SEQUENCE; ENDOMETRIUM CARCINOMA; ESOPHAGUS CANCER; FLOW CYTOMETRY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGE BASED CYTOMETRY; LUNG CANCER; MICROSCOPY; MOLECULAR MODEL; NEEDLE BIOPSY; OVARY CANCER; PEER REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE CARCINOMA; PROSTATECTOMY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RECTUM CANCER; REVIEW; ULCERATIVE COLITIS; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; CHROMOSOMAL INSTABILITY; GENETICS; NEOPLASMS; PROCEDURES; PROGNOSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

ANEUPLOIDY; BIOMARKERS, TUMOR; CHROMOSOMAL INSTABILITY; DNA, NEOPLASM; FLOW CYTOMETRY; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; PROGNOSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 84948434186     PISSN: 17594774     EISSN: 17594782     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2015.208     Document Type: Review

References (178)

1. Thorpe, P. H., Gonzalez-Barrera, S., Rothstein, R. More is not always better: the genetic constraints of polyploidy. Trends Genet. 23, 263-266 (2007).
2. Davoli, T., de Lange, T. The causes and consequences of polyploidy in normal development and cancer. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 27, 585-610 (2011).
3. Oberringer, M. et al. Centrosome multiplication accompanies a transient clustering of polyploid cells during tissue repair. Mol. Cell Biol. Res. Commun. 2, 190-196 (1999).
4. Lara-Gonzalez, P., Westhorpe, F. G., Taylor, S. S. The spindle assembly checkpoint. Curr. Biol. 22, R966-R980 (2012).
5. Nam, H. J., van Deursen, J. M. Cyclin B2 and p53 control proper timing of centrosome separation. Nat. Cell Biol. 16, 538-549 (2014).
6. Rajagopalan, H., Lengauer, C. Aneuploidy and cancer. Nature 432, 338-341 (2004).
7. Rehen, S. K. et al. Constitutional aneuploidy in the normal human brain. J. Neurosci. 25, 2176-2180 (2005).
8. Westra, J. W. et al. Neuronal DNA content variation (DCV) with regional and individual differences in the human brain. J. Comp. Neurol. 518, 3981-4000 (2010).
9. Boveri, T. Concerning the origin of malignant tumours by Theodor Boveri. Translated and annotated by Henry Harris. J. Cell Sci. 121 (Suppl. 1), 1-84 (2008).
10. Davoli, T. et al. Cumulative haploinsufficiency and triplosensitivity drive aneuploidy patterns and shape the cancer genome. Cell 155, 948-962 (2013).
11. King, R. W. When 2 + 2 = 5: the origins and fates of aneuploid and tetraploid cells. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1786, 4-14 (2008).
12. de Carcer, G., Malumbres, M. A centrosomal route for cancer genome instability. Nat. Cell Biol. 16, 504-506 (2014).
13. Janssen, A., van der Burg, M., Szuhai, K., Kops, G. J., Medema, R. H. Chromosome segregation errors as a cause of DNA damage and structural chromosome aberrations. Science 333, 1895-1898 (2011).
14. Losada, A. Cohesin in cancer: chromosome segregation and beyond. Nat. Rev. Cancer 14, 389-393 (2014).
15. Lee, H. How chromosome mis-segregation leads to cancer: lessons from BubR1 mouse models. Mol. Cell 37, 713-718 (2014).
16. Bakhoum, S. F., Swanton, C. Chromosomal instability, aneuploidy, and cancer. Front. Oncol. 4, 161 (2014).
17. McGranahan, N., Burrell, R. A., Endesfelder, D., Novelli, M. R., Swanton, C. Cancer chromosomal instability: therapeutic and diagnostic challenges. EMBO Rep. 13, 528-538 (2012).
18. Davaadelger, B., Shen, H., Maki, C. G. Novel roles for p53 in the genesis and targeting of tetraploid cancer cells. PLoS ONE 9, e110844 (2014).
19. Coward, J., Harding, A. Size does matter: why polyploid tumor cells are critical drug targets in the war on cancer. Front. Oncol. 4, 123 (2014).
20. Hanahan, D., Weinberg, R. A. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell 144, 646-674 (2011).
21. Vogelstein, B. et al. Genetic alterations during colorectal-tumor development. N. Engl. J. Med. 319, 525-532 (1988).
22. Duesberg, P., Fabarius, A., Hehlmann, R. Aneuploidy, the primary cause of the multilateral genomic instability of neoplastic and preneoplastic cells. IUBMB Life 56, 65-81 (2004).
23. Pihan, G., Doxsey, S. J. Mutations and aneuploidy: co-conspirators in cancer Cancer Cell 4, 89-94 (2003).
24. Belien, J. A. et al. Gross genomic damage measured by DNA image cytometry independently predicts gastric cancer patient survival. Br. J. Cancer 101, 1011-1018 (2009).
25. Kristensen, G. B. et al. Large-scale genomic instability predicts long-term outcome for women with invasive stage I ovarian cancer. Ann. Oncol. 14, 1494-1500 (2003).
26. Bol, M. G. et al. Correlation of grade of urothelial cell carcinomas and DNA histogram features assessed by flow cytometry and automated image cytometry. Anal. Cell. Pathol. 25, 147-153 (2003).
27. Crisp, H., Burton, J. L., Stewart, R., Wells, M. Refining the diagnosis of hydatidiform mole: image ploidy analysis and p57KIP2 immunohistochemistry. Histopathology 43, 363-373 (2003).
28. Dunn, J. M. et al. Image cytometry accurately detects DNA ploidy abnormalities and predicts late relapse to high-grade dysplasia and adenocarcinoma in Barrett's oesophagus following photodynamic therapy. Br. J. Cancer 102, 1608-1617 (2010).
29. Wohlrab, D., Klapperstuck, T., Holzhausen, H. J., Held, A., Hein, W. DNA image cytometry on sections compared with flow cytometry in human bone metastases. Oncol. Rep. 14, 1005-1012 (2005).
30. Baak, J. P. et al. DNA cytometric features in biopsies of TaT1 urothelial cell cancer predict recurrence and stage progression more accurately than stage, grade, or treatment modality. Urology 61, 1266-1272 (2003).
31. Böcking, A., Giroud, F., Reith, A. Consensus report of the European Society for Analytical Cellular Pathology task force on standardization of diagnostic DNA image cytometry. Anal. Quant. Cytol. Histol. 17, 1-7 (1995).
32. Caspersson, T. O. History of the development of cytophotometry from 1935 to the present. Anal. Quant. Cytol. Histol. 9, 2-6 (1987).
33. D'Urso, V., Collodoro, A., Mattioli, E., Giordano, A., Bagella, L. Cytometry and DNA ploidy: clinical uses and molecular perspective in gastric and lung cancer. J. Cell. Physiol. 222, 532-539 (2010).
34. Ross, J. S. et al. DNA ploidy and cell cycle analysis in breast cancer. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 120 (Suppl.), S72-S84 (2003).
35. Biesterfeld, S., Beckers, S., Del, C., V & Schramm, M. Feulgen staining remains the gold standard for precise DNA image cytometry. Anticancer Res. 31, 53-58 (2011).
36. Susini, T. et al. DNA ploidy is stronger than lymph node metastasis as prognostic factor in cervical carcinoma: 10-year results of a prospective study. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 21, 678-684 (2011).
37. Kipp, B. R., Sebo, T. J., Griffin, M. D., Ihrke, J. M., Halling, K. C. Analysis of polyomavirus-infected renal transplant recipients' urine specimens: correlation of routine urine cytology, fluorescence in situ hybridization, and digital image analysis. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 124, 854-861 (2005).
38. Rygiel, A. M. et al. Efficient automated assessment of genetic abnormalities detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization on brush cytology in a Barrett esophagus surveillance population. Cancer 109, 1980-1988 (2007).
39. Schramm, M. et al. Equivocal cytology in lung cancer diagnosis: improvement of diagnostic accuracy using adjuvant multicolor FISH, DNA-image cytometry, and quantitative promoter hypermethylation analysis. Cancer Cytopathol. 119, 177-192 (2011).
40. Barr Fritcher, E. G. et al. Correlating routine cytology, quantitative nuclear morphometry by digital image analysis, and genetic alterations by fluorescence in situ hybridization to assess the sensitivity of cytology for detecting pancreatobiliary tract malignancy. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 128, 272-279 (2007).
41. Debes, J. D. et al. p300 modulates nuclear morphology in prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 65, 708-712 (2005).
42. Garner, D. Clinical application of DNA ploidy to cervical cancer screening: a review. World J. Clin. Oncol. 5, 931-965 (2014).
43. Sun, X. R., Wang, J., Garner, D., Palcic, B. Detection of cervical cancer and high grade neoplastic lesions by a combination of liquid-based sampling preparation and DNA measurements using automated image cytometry. Cell. Oncol. 27, 33-41 (2005).
44. Auffermann, W., Fohlmeister, I., Böcking, A. Diagnostic and prognostic value of DNA image cytometry in myelodysplasia. J. Clin. Pathol. 41, 604-608 (1988).
45. Yildirim-Assaf, S. et al. The prognostic significance of determining DNA content in breast cancer by DNA image cytometry: the role of high grade aneuploidy in node negative breast cancer. J. Clin. Pathol. 60, 649-655 (2007).
46. Pradhan, M. et al. Prognostic importance of DNA ploidy and DNA index in stage I and II endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the endometrium. Ann. Oncol. 23, 1178-1184 (2011).
47. Bagwell, C. B. et al. Optimizing flow cytometric DNA ploidy and S-phase fraction as independent prognostic markers for node-negative breast cancer specimens. Cytometry 46, 121-135 (2001).
48. Jonas, S. et al. Prognostic significance of the DNA-index in liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis. Ann. Surg. 250, 1008-1013 (2009).
49. Wenger, C. R., Clark, G. M. S-phase fraction and breast cancer-a decade of experience. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 51, 255-265 (1998).
50. Hiddemann, W. et al. Convention on nomenclature for DNA cytometry. Committee on Nomenclature, Society for Analytical Cytology. Cancer Genet. Cytogenet. 13, 181-183 (1984).
51. Haroske, G. et al. Fourth updated ESACP consensus report on diagnostic DNA image cytometry. Anal. Cell. Pathol. 23, 89-95 (2001).
52. Benson, N. A., Braylan, R. C. Evaluation of sensitivity in DNA aneuploidy detection using a mathematical model. Cytometry 15, 53-58 (1994).
53. So, M. J. et al. Factors that influence the measurement of prostate cancer DNA ploidy and proliferation in paraffin embedded tissue evaluated by flow cytometry. Mod. Pathol. 14, 906-912 (2001).
54. Sebo, T. J. et al. Perineural invasion and MIB-1 positivity in addition to Gleason score are significant preoperative predictors of progression after radical retropubic prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 26, 431-439 (2002).
55. Tollefson, M. et al. Prostate cancer Ki-67 (MIB-1) expression, perineural invasion and Gleason score as biopsy-based prefictors of prostate cancer mortality: the Mayo model. Mayo Clin. Proc. 89, 308-318 (2014).
56. Giroud, F., Haroske, G., Reith, A., Böcking, A. 1997 ESACP consensus report on diagnostic DNA image cytometry. Part II: specific recommendations for quality assurance. European Society for Analytical Cellular Pathology. Anal. Cell. Pathol. 17, 201-208 (1998).
57. Haroske, G., Giroud, F., Reith, A., Böcking, A. 1997 ESACP consensus report on diagnostic DNA image cytometry. Part I: basic considerations and recommendations for preparation, measurement and interpretation. European Society for Analytical Cellular Pathology. Anal. Cell. Pathol. 17, 189-200 (1998).
58. Ormerod, M. G., Tribukait, B., Giaretti, W. Consensus report of the task force on standardisation of DNA flow cytometry in clinical pathology. DNA Flow Cytometry Task Force of the European Society for Analytical Cellular Pathology. Anal. Cell. Pathol. 17, 103-110 (1998).
59. Sperandio, M. et al. Predictive value of dysplasia grading and DNA ploidy in malignant transformation of oral potentially malignant disorders. Cancer Prev. Res. (Phila.) 6, 822-831 (2013).
60. Hering, B., Horn, L. C., Nenning, H., Kuhndel, K. Predictive value of DNA cytometry in CIN 1 and 2. Image analysis of 193 cases. Anal. Quant. Cytol. Histol. 22, 333-337 (2000).
61. Pradhan, M., Abeler, V. M., Danielsen, H. E., Tropé, C. G., Risberg, B. A. Image cytometry DNA ploidy correlates with histological subtypes in endometrial carcinomas. Mod. Pathol. 19, 1227-1235 (2006).
62. Hveem, T. S. et al. Prognostic impact of genomic instability in colorectal cancer. Br. J. Cancer 110, 2159-2164 (2014).
63. Laubert, T. et al. Aneuploidy and elevated CEA indicate an increased risk for metachronous metastasis in colorectal cancer. Int. J. Colorectal Dis. 28, 767-775 (2013).
64. Grabsch, H., Kerr, D., Quirke, P. Is there a case for routine clinical application of ploidy measurements in gastrointestinal tumours Histopathology 45, 312-334 (2004).
65. Park, S. Y. et al. Heterogeneity for stem cell-related markers according to tumor subtype and histologic stage in breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 16, 876-887 (2010).
66. Newburger, D. E. et al. Genome evolution during progression to breast cancer. Genome Res. 23, 1097-1108 (2013).
67. Arpino, G. et al. Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: a clinical perspective. Breast 22, 109-120 (2013).
68. Habermann, J. K. et al. The gene expression signature of genomic instability in breast cancer is an independent predictor of clinical outcome. Int. J. Cancer 124, 1552-1564 (2009).
69. Szasz, A. M. et al. The CIN4 chromosomal instability qPCR classifier defines tumor aneuploidy and stratifies outcome in grade 2 breast cancer. PLoS ONE 8, e56707 (2013).
70. Tryggvadottir, L. et al. Tumour diploidy and survival in breast cancer patients with BRCA2 mutations. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 140, 375-384 (2013).
71. Pinto, A. E. et al. DNA ploidy is an independent predictor of survival in breast invasive ductal carcinoma: a long-term multivariate analysis of 393 patients. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 20, 1530-1537 (2013).
72. Karra, H. et al. Securin predicts aneuploidy and survival in breast cancer. Histopathology 60, 586-596 (2012).
73. Gazic, B. et al. S-phase fraction determined on fine needle aspirates is an independent prognostic factor in breast cancer-a multivariate study of 770 patients. Cytopathology 19, 294-302 (2008).
74. Mandard, A. M. et al. Prognostic value of DNA cytometry in 281 premenopausal patients with lymph node negative breast carcinoma randomized in a control trial: multivariate analysis with Ki-67 index, mitotic count, and microvessel density. Cancer 89, 1748-1757 (2000).
75. Pinto, A. E., Andre, S., Pereira, T., Silva, G., Soares, J. DNA flow cytometry but not telomerase activity as predictor of disease-free survival in pT1-2/N0/G2 breast cancer. Pathobiology 73, 63-70 (2006).
76. Moureau-Zabotto, L. et al. Combined flow cytometry determination of S-phase fraction and DNA ploidy is an independent prognostic factor in node-negative invasive breast carcinoma: analysis of a series of 271 patients with stage I and II breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 91, 61-71 (2005).
77. Li, L. et al. Genomic instability and proliferative activity as risk factors for distant metastases in breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer 99, 513-519 (2008).
78. Hicks, J. et al. Novel patterns of genome rearrangement and their association with survival in breast cancer. Genome Res. 16, 1465-1479 (2006).
79. Chavez-Uribe, E. et al. Hypoploidy defines patients with poor prognosis in breast cancer. Oncol. Rep. 17, 1109-1114 (2007).
80. Gadducci, A., Barsotti, C., Cosio, S., Domenici, L., Riccardo, G. A. Smoking habit, immune suppression, oral contraceptive use, and hormone replacement therapy use and cervical carcinogenesis: a review of the literature. Gynecol. Endocrinol. 27, 597-604 (2011).
81. Matias-Guiu, X., Davidson, B. Prognostic biomarkers in endometrial and ovarian carcinoma. Virchows Arch. 464, 315-331 (2014).
82. Werner, H. M., Salvesen, H. B. Current status of molecular biomarkers in endometrial cancer. Curr. Oncol. Rep. 16, 403 (2014).
83. Mauland, K. K., Wik, E., Salvesen, H. B. Clinical value of DNA content assessment in endometrial cancer. Cytometry B Clin. Cytom. 86, 154-163 (2014).
84. Steinbakk, A. et al. Biomarkers and microsatellite instability analysis of curettings can predict the behavior of FIGO stage I endometrial endometrioid adenocarcinoma. Mod. Pathol. 24, 1262-1271 (2011).
85. Wik, E. et al. Deoxyribonucleic acid ploidy in endometrial carcinoma: a reproducible and valid prognostic marker in a routine diagnostic setting. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 201, 603-607 (2009).
86. Lim, P. et al. Low-risk endometrial carcinoma: assessment of a treatment policy based on tumor ploidy and identification of additional prognostic indicators. Gynecol. Oncol. 73, 191-195 (1999).
87. Mangili, G. et al. The role of DNA ploidy in postoperative management of stage I endometrial cancer. Ann. Oncol. 19, 1278-1283 (2008).
88. Hogberg, T. et al. A prospective population-based management program including primary surgery and postoperative risk assessment by means of DNA ploidy and histopathology. Adjuvant radiotherapy is not necessary for the majority of patients with FIGO stage I-II endometrial cancer. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 14, 437-450 (2004).
89. Lindahl, B., Masback, A., Persson, J., Ranstam, J., Willlen, R. Adenocarcinoma corpus uteri stage I-II: results of a treatment programme based upon cytometry. Anticancer Res. 29, 4731-4735 (2009).
90. Vang, R., Shih Ie, M., Kurman, R. J. Ovarian low-grade and high-grade serous carcinoma: pathogenesis, clinicopathologic and molecular biologic features, and diagnostic problems. Adv. Anat. Pathol. 16, 267-282 (2009).
91. Jones, S. et al. Low-grade serous carcinomas of the ovary contain very few point mutations. J. Pathol. 226, 413-420 (2012).
92. Fox, H. Ploidy in gynaecological cancers. Histopathology 46, 121-129 (2005).
93. Tropé, C. G., Kaern, J., Davidson, B. Borderline ovarian tumours. Best. Pract. Res. Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol. 26, 325-336 (2012).
94. Pradhan, M. et al. Gross genomic alterations differ between serous borderline tumors and serous adenocarcinomas-an image cytometric DNA ploidy analysis of 307 cases with histogenetic implications. Virchows Arch. 454, 677-683 (2009).
95. Flezar, M. S., But, I., Kavalar, R., Us-Krasovec, M. Flow and image cytometric DNA ploidy, including 5c exceeding cells, of serous borderline malignant ovarian tumors. Correlation with clinicopathologic characteristics. Anal. Quant. Cytol. Histol. 25, 139-145 (2003).
96. Kaern, J., Tropé, C. G., Kristensen, G. B., Abeler, V. M., Pettersen, E. O. DNA ploidy; the most important prognostic factor in patients with borderline tumors of the ovary. Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer 3, 349-358 (1993).
97. Böcking, A., Nguyen, V. Q. Diagnostic and prognostic use of DNA image cytometry in cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions and invasive carcinoma. Cancer 102, 41-54 (2004).
98. Reich, O., Ballon, M. DNA cytometry as a first-line method for diagnosis of cervical precancer with respect to clinical behaviour. Eur. J. Gynaecol. Oncol. 31, 372-374 (2010).
99. zur Hausen, H. Cervical carcinoma and human papillomavirus: on the road to preventing a major human cancer. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 93, 252-253 (2001).
100. Lorenzato, M. et al. Usefulness of DNA ploidy measurement on liquid-based smears showing conflicting results between cytology and high-risk human papillomavirus typing. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 118, 708-713 (2002).
101. Lorenzato, M. et al. Contribution of DNA ploidy image cytometry to the management of ASC cervical lesions. Cancer 114, 263-269 (2008).
102. Tong, H. et al. DNA ploidy cytometry testing for cervical cancer screening in China (DNACIC Trial): a prospective randomized, controlled trial. Clin. Cancer Res. 15, 6438-6445 (2009).
103. Colditz, G. A., Crowley, J. DNA cytometry testing for cervical cancer screening: approaches and reporting standards for new technologies. Clin. Cancer Res. 17, 6971-6972 (2011).
104. Grote, H. J. et al. Prognostic significance of DNA cytometry in carcinoma of the uterine cervix FIGO stage IB and II. Anal. Cell. Pathol. 23, 97-105 (2001).
105. Reid, B. J., Levine, D. S., Longton, G., Blount, P. L., Rabinovitch, P. S. Predictors of progression to cancer in Barrett's esophagus: baseline histology and flow cytometry identify low-and high-risk patient subsets. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 95, 1669-1676 (2000).
106. Reid, B. J., Li, X., Galipeau, P. C., Vaughan, T. L. Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal adenocarcinoma: time for a new synthesis. Nat. Rev. Cancer 10, 87-101 (2010).
107. Borovicka, J. et al. Is there an advantage to be gained from adding digital image cytometry of brush cytology to a standard biopsy protocol in patients with Barrett's esophagus Endoscopy 41, 409-414 (2009).
108. Vogt, N., Schonegg, R., Gschossmann, J. M., Borovicka, J. Benefit of baseline cytometry for surveillance of patients with Barrett's esophagus. Surg. Endosc. 24, 1144-1150 (2010).
109. Bird-Lieberman, E. L. et al. Population-based study reveals new risk-stratification biomarker panel for Barrett's esophagus. Gastroenterology 143, 927-935 (2012).
110. Habermann, J. et al. Ulcerative colitis and colorectal carcinoma: DNA-profile, laminin-5 2 chain and cyclin A expression as early markers for risk assessment. Scand. J. Gastroenterol. 36, 751-758 (2001).
111. Friis-Ottessen, M. et al. Telomere shortening correlates to dysplasia but not to DNA aneuploidy in longstanding ulcerative colitis. BMC Gastroenterol. 14, 8 (2014).
112. Scarpa, M. et al. Inflammatory colonic carcinogenesis: a review on pathogenesis and immunosurveillance mechanisms in ulcerative colitis. World J. Gastroenterol. 20, 6774-6785 (2014).
113. Gerling, M. et al. High frequency of aneuploidy defines ulcerative colitis-associated carcinomas: a comparative prognostic study to sporadic colorectal carcinomas. Ann. Surg. 252, 74-83 (2010).
114. Gerling, M. et al. Aneuploidy-associated gene expression signatures characterize malignant transformation in ulcerative colitis. Inflamm. Bowel. Dis. 19, 691-703 (2013).
115. Jemal, A., Center, M. M., DeSantis, C., Ward, E. M. Global patterns of cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 19, 1893-1907 (2010).
116. Labianca, R. et al. Early colon cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 24 (Suppl. 6), vi64-vi72 (2013).
117. Domingo, E. et al. Use of multivariate analysis to suggest a new molecular classification of colorectal cancer. J. Pathol. 229, 441-448 (2013).
118. Walther, A., Houlston, R., Tomlinson, I. Association between chromosomal instability and prognosis in colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Gut 57, 941-950 (2008).
119. Araujo, S. E., Bernardo, W. M., Habr-Gama, A., Kiss, D. R., Cecconello, I. DNA ploidy status and prognosis in colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of published data. Dis. Colon Rectum 50, 1800-1810 (2007).
120. Mouradov, D. et al. Survival in stage II/III colorectal cancer is independently predicted by chromosomal and microsatellite instability, but not by specific driver mutations. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 108, 1785-1793 (2013).
121. Sinicrope, F. A. et al. Prognostic impact of microsatellite instability and DNA ploidy in human colon carcinoma patients. Gastroenterology 131, 729-737 (2006).
122. Watanabe, T. et al. Chromosomal instability (CIN) phenotype, CIN high or CIN low, predicts survival for colorectal cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 30, 2256-2264 (2012).
123. Risques, R. A. et al. Genetic pathways and genome-wide determinants of clinical outcome in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res. 63, 7206-7214 (2003).
124. Calistri, D. et al. KRAS, p53 and BRAF gene mutations and aneuploidy in sporadic colorectal cancer progression. Cell. Oncol. 28, 161-166 (2006).
125. Foss, K. M. et al. miR-1254 and miR-574-5p: serum-based microRNA biomarkers for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 6, 482-488 (2011).
126. Coate, L. E., John, T., Tsao, M. S., Shepherd, F. A. Molecular predictive and prognostic markers in non-small-cell lung cancer. Lancet Oncol. 10, 1001-1010 (2009).
127. Marek, W., Richartz, G., Philippou, S., Marek, L., Kotschy-Lang, N. Sputum screening for lung cancer in radon exposed uranium miners: a comparison of semi-automated sputum cytometry and conventional cytology. J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 58 (Suppl. 5), 349-361 (2007).
128. Kemp, R. A., Reinders, D. M., Turic, B. Detection of lung cancer by automated sputum cytometry. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2, 993-1000 (2007).
129. Yang, J., Zhou, Y. Detection of DNA aneuploidy in exfoliated airway epithelia cells of sputum specimens by the automated image cytometry and its clinical value in the identification of lung cancer. J. Huazhong. Univ. Sci. Technolog. Med. Sci. 24, 407-410 (2004).
130. Xing, S. et al. Predictive value of image cytometry for diagnosis of lung cancer in heavy smokers. Eur. Respir. J. 25, 956-963 (2005).
131. Varella-Garcia, M. Chromosomal and genomic changes in lung cancer. Cell Adh. Migr. 4, 100-106 (2010).
132. Choma, D., Daures, J. P., Quantin, X., Pujol, J. L. Aneuploidy and prognosis of non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis of published data. Br. J. Cancer 85, 14-22 (2001).
133. Dyszkiewicz, W., Kasprzyk, M., Piwkowski, C., Gasiorowski, L., Ramlau, R. The prognostic value of DNA content analysis in patients with squamous cell lung cancer treated surgically. Lung Cancer 29, 161-167 (2000).
134. Petersen, I. et al. Core classification of lung cancer: correlating nuclear size and mitoses with ploidy and clinicopathological parameters. Lung Cancer 65, 312-318 (2009).
135. Sebo, T. J. et al. Predicting prostate carcinoma volume and stage at radical prostatectomy by assessing needle biopsy specimens for percent surface area and cores positive for carcinoma, perineural invasion, Gleason score, DNA ploidy and proliferation, and preoperative serum prostate specific antigen: a report of 454 cases. Cancer 91, 2196-2204 (2001).
136. Lorenzato, M. et al. DNA image cytometry on biopsies can help the detection of localized Gleason 3 + 3 prostate cancers. J. Urol. 172, 1311-1313 (2004).
137. Fine, S. W., Epstein, J. I. A contemporary study correlating prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason score. J. Urol. 179, 1335-1338 (2008).
138. Sengupta, S. et al. Conventional assessment of needle biopsy specimens is more useful than digital image analysis of proliferation and DNA ploidy in prediction of positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy. Urology 68, 94-98 (2006).
139. Isharwal, S. et al. DNA ploidy as surrogate for biopsy Gleason score for preoperative organ versus nonorgan-confined prostate cancer prediction. Urology 73, 1092-1097 (2009).
140. Böcking, A., Tils, M., Schramm, M., Dietz, J., Biesterfeld, S. DNA-cytometric grading of prostate cancer systematic review with descriptive data analysis. Pathol. Discov. 2, 1-20 (2014).
141. Keyes, M. et al. DNA ploidy measured on archived pretreatment biopsy material may correlate with prostate-specific antigen recurrence after prostate brachytherapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 86, 829-834 (2013).
142. Pollack, A. et al. Prostate cancer DNA ploidy and response to salvage hormone therapy after radiotherapy with or without short-term total androgen blockade: an analysis of RTOG 8610. J. Clin. Oncol. 21, 1238-1248 (2003).
143. Ward, J. F., Sebo, T. J., Blute, M. L., Zincke, H. Salvage surgery for radiorecurrent prostate cancer: contemporary outcomes. J. Urol. 173, 1156-1160 (2005).
144. Ross, J. S. et al. Prognostic factors in prostate cancer. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 120 (Suppl.), S85-S100 (2003).
145. Bantis, A. et al. Telomerase RNA expression and DNA ploidy as prognostic markers of prostate carcinomas. Tumori 95, 744-752 (2009).
146. Lau, W. K. et al. Prognostic factors for survival of patients with pathological Gleason score 7 prostate cancer: differences in outcome between primary Gleason grades 3 and 4. J. Urol. 166, 1692-1697 (2001).
147. Martinez-Jabaloyas, J. M., Ruiz-Cerda, J. L., Hernandez, M., Jimenez, A., Jimenez-Cruz, F. Prognostic value of DNA ploidy and nuclear morphometry in prostate cancer treated with androgen deprivation. Urology 59, 715-720 (2002).
148. Deliveliotis, C. et al. The prognostic value of p53 and DNA ploidy following radical prostatectomy. World J. Urol. 21, 171-176 (2003).
149. Pretorius, M. E. et al. Large scale genomic instability as an additive prognostic marker in early prostate cancer. Cell. Oncol. 31, 251-259 (2009).
150. Horninger, W. et al. Characteristics of prostate cancers detected at low PSA levels. Prostate 58, 232-237 (2004).
151. Shi, Q., King, R. W. Chromosome nondisjunction yields tetraploid rather than aneuploid cells in human cell lines. Nature 437, 1038-1042 (2005).
152. Alvarez, A. L. High incidence of aneuploidy in low grade urothelial carcinomas. Int. J. Urol. 15, 279 (2008).
153. Ross, J. S., Cohen, M. B. Biomarkers for the detection of bladder cancer. Adv. Anat. Pathol. 8, 37-45 (2001).
154. Ramos, D. prognostic markers in low-grade papillary urothelial neoplams of the urinary bladder: an update. Diagn. Histopathol. 15, 42-50 (2011).
155. Palmeira, C. A. et al. DNA image cytometry in bladder cancer: state of the art. Anticancer Res. 28, 443-450 (2008).
156. Yamamoto, Y. et al. Biological characteristics in bladder cancer depend on the type of genetic instability. Clin. Cancer Res. 12, 2752-2758 (2006).
157. Deliveliotis, C. et al. DNA ploidy as a prognostic factor in muscle invasive transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Urol. Res. 33, 39-43 (2005).
158. Gerlinger, M. et al. Intratumor heterogeneity and branched evolution revealed by multiregion sequencing. N. Engl. J. Med. 366, 883-892 (2012).
159. Malhotra, A. et al. Ploidy-Seq: inferring mutational chronology by sequencing polyploid tumor subpopulations. Genome Med. 7, 6 (2015).
160. Lengauer, C., Kinzler, K. W., Vogelstein, B. Genetic instability in colorectal cancers. Nature 386, 623-627 (1997).
161. Sheltzer, J. M. A transcriptional and metabolic signature of primary aneuploidy is present in chromosomally unstable cancer cells and informs clinical prognosis. Cancer Res. 73, 6401-6412 (2013).
162. Ambros, P. F. et al. International consensus for neuroblastoma molecular diagnostics: report from the International Neuroblastoma Risk Group (INRG) Biology Committee. Br. J. Cancer 100, 1471-1482 (2009).
163. Netto, G. J. et al. Interobserver variability in histologic evaluation of radical prostatectomy between central and local pathologists: findings of TAX 3501 multinational clinical trial. Urology 77, 1155-1160 (2011).
164. Takanishi, D. M. Jr, Hart, J., Covarelli, P., Chappell, R., Michelassi, F. Ploidy as a prognostic feature in colonic adenocarcinoma. Arch. Surg. 131, 587-592 (1996).
165. Sinicrope, F. A. et al. Apoptotic and mitotic indices predict survival rates in lymph node-negative colon carcinomas. Clin. Cancer Res. 5, 1793-1804 (1999).
166. Armitage, N. C. et al. A prospective evaluation of the effect of tumor cell DNA content on recurrence in colorectal cancer. Cancer 67, 2599-2604 (1991).
167. Chapman, M. A., Hardcastle, J. D., Armitage, N. C. Five-year prospective study of DNA tumor ploidy and colorectal cancer survival. Cancer 76, 383-387 (1995).
168. Lanza, G. et al. Prognostic significance of DNA ploidy in patients with stage II and stage III colon carcinoma: a prospective flow cytometric study. Cancer 82, 49-59 (1998).
169. Buglioni, S. et al. p53 nuclear accumulation and multiploidy are adverse prognostic factors in surgically resected stage II colorectal cancers independent of fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 116, 360-368 (2001).
170. Kay, E. W., Mulcahy, H. E., Curran, B., O'Donoghue, D. P., Leader, M. An image analysis study of DNA content in early colorectal cancer. Eur. J. Cancer 32A, 612-616 (1996).
171. Garrity, M. M. et al. Prognostic value of proliferation, apoptosis, defective DNA mismatch repair, and p53 overexpression in patients with resected Dukes' B2 or C colon cancer: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study. J. Clin. Oncol. 22, 1572-1582 (2004).
172. Zarbo, R. J. et al. Prognostic significance of DNA ploidy and proliferation in 309 colorectal carcinomas as determined by two-color multiparametric DNA flow cytometry. Cancer 79, 2073-2086 (1997).
173. Kokal, W. A. et al. Tumor DNA content in resectable, primary colorectal carcinoma. Ann. Surg. 209, 188-193 (1989).
174. Tomoda, H., Baba, H., Saito, T., Wada, S. DNA index as a significant predictor of recurrence in colorectal cancer. Dis. Colon Rectum 41, 286-290 (1998).
175. Cosimelli, M. et al. The role of multiploidy as unfavorable prognostic variable in colorectal cancer. Anticancer Res. 18, 1957-1965 (1998).
176. Bondi, J., Pretorius, M., Bukholm, I., Danielsen, H. Large-scale genomic instability in colon adenocarcinomas and correlation with patient outcome. APMIS 117, 730-736 (2009).
177. Ahnen, D. J. Abnormal DNA content as a biomarker of large bowel cancer risk and prognosis. J. Cell. Biochem. Suppl. 16G, 143-150 (1992).
178. Nori, D. et al. Tumor ploidy as a risk factor for disease recurrence and short survival in surgically treated Dukes' B2 colon cancer patients. Tumour Biol. 17, 75-80 (1996).