2001
DOI: 10.1212/wnl.56.9.1224
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differentiation between reactive gliosis and diffuse astrocytoma by in situ hybridization

Abstract: The authors examined the use of chromosomal analysis by in situ hybridization to differentiate between nonneoplastic reactive gliosis and astrocytomas in cases in which routine histology was inconclusive. Numerical chromosomal aberrations were found in 80% of low-grade astrocytoma specimens and in none of the reactive gliosis specimens. Aneusomic tumor cells were detected in four of 13 stereotactic samples with an initially inconclusive tissue diagnosis, three of which were later diagnosed as astrocytoma. The … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…So far, no single immunohistochemical marker can clearly distinguish these cases. In recent years, attempts to discriminate between reactive and neoplastic astrocytes have employed various molecular genetic methods, including in situ hybridization to detect chromosomal aberrations absent in non‐neoplastic tissue (50). However, these methods are elaborate, expensive and cannot replace the usefulness of immunostaining.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…So far, no single immunohistochemical marker can clearly distinguish these cases. In recent years, attempts to discriminate between reactive and neoplastic astrocytes have employed various molecular genetic methods, including in situ hybridization to detect chromosomal aberrations absent in non‐neoplastic tissue (50). However, these methods are elaborate, expensive and cannot replace the usefulness of immunostaining.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Overall survival was assessed from the patients' records. As controls, 10 samples with non‐neoplastic reactive gliosis were examined (Wessels et al, 2001). These samples were derived at postmortem examination from patients who died from non‐neoplastic neurological causes, that is, brain infarction (n = 5), hemorrhagic infarction (n = 1), traumatic hemorrhage (n = 2), and hypoxic encephalopathy (n = 2).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several techniques besides histology have been applied to distinguish gliomas from gliosis: microsatellite analysis to examine loss of heterozygosity (17), fluorescent in situ hybridization (FiSH) (42), in situ hybridization (43), comparative genomic hybridization (44,45), rna microarray expression analysis (46), certain proteomic techniques (47) and microdissection techniques, coupled with polymerase chain reaction amplification (48).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%