Progression: the terminal stage in carcinogenesis

Oncogenes, malignant transformation, and modern medicine

During the past decade there have been remarkable strides in the understanding of the basic mechanism of cancer. It is now clear that there is a set of genes, known as oncogenes, that can cause cells to become malignant if their expression is altered, either by mutation or overexpression. The products of these genes include growth factors, growth factor receptors, signal tranduction proteins, and DNA binding proteins. The normal cellular counterparts of these genes play very important roles in the regulation of growth and proliferation by normal cells. Another set of genes, anti-oncogenes, also play an important role in preventing abnormal cell proliferation. The remarkable explosion of understanding of the pathophysiology of malignancy has led to a common unifying concept of malignant transformation that applies to all tumors. It is likely that these new insights will lead to improved and more specific treatments for malignant disease in the next decade.

Cytophotometry in tumor pathology. A critical review of methods and applications, and some results of DNA analysis

In tumor pathology the quantitation of cellular substances can be of diagnostic value. Microscope cytophotometry and digital image analysis and, on the other hand, flow cytometry are supplementary methods for measuring, each with a typical spectrum of application. The methods are predominantly used for DNA analysis: Static and image cytophotometry are applicable to cytologic and histologic slides preferably for identifying stem lines in tumors of heterogenous morphology and in merely circumscribed lesions (e.g., precancerous lesions). On the other hand, sampling errors due to preselection, and the often low number of cells actually measured, may preclude the possibility of exact cell cycle analysis. This is, in fact, an important additional option of flow cytometry resulting from the high resolution of DNA histograms, which is explained by the large number of cells that can be measured in a short period. Sampling errors in flow cytometry may result from the preparation of single cell suspensions which in certain tumor entities may suppress a varying amount of particularly fragile cells or nuclei. The prognostic significance of DNA ploidy, stem line heterogeneity and S-phase fraction is clearly described in quite a number of tumor entities. Independent of its prognostic value, the cytometric identification of stem lines might be particularly useful in the follow-up of tumor patients, where it may indicate the effectivity of systemic therapy. The development of therapeutic concepts is aptly supported by flow cytometric cell cycle analysis which helps to assess the in vitro effect of combined cytostatics on the proliferative process. Moreover, multiparameter analysis of biopsy samples may provide greater accuracy in characterising individual tumor stem lines and may furthermore help to develop improved protocols for the therapy of solid tumors.

Detection of chemical carcinogens by means of the "rat liver foci bioassay"

The rat liver foci bioassay designed as short-term screening test system in vivo is a reliable procedure for the detection of the carcinogenic potential of chemicals. The use of tumor prestages as markers is favorable in many respects: 1. There is a convincing correlation between foci and tumors. 2. The sensitivity is by a factor of more than 1,000 higher compared to the chronic carcinogenicity study. 3. It is the only system available so far for detecting liver tumor promotors. 4. There is promising prospect that carcinogenic agents with extrahepatic target organs can be detected.

Critical parameters in the quantitation of the stages of initiation, promotion, and progression in one model of hepatocarcinogenesis in the rat

Critical parameters in the quantitation of altered hepatic foci (AHF) developing during multistage hepatocarcinogenesis in the rat include: 1) the enumeration of AHF induced by test agents as well as those AHF occurring spontaneously in livers of untreated animals; 2) the volume percentage or fraction of the liver occupied by all AHF as a reflection of the total number of altered cells within the liver and the degree of tumor promotion which has occurred; and 3) the phenotype of individual AHF as determined by multiple markers with serial sections. These parameters, especially the number of AHF, should be corrected by the presence of spontaneous AHF which increase with the age of the animal, more so in males than females. While accurate estimation of the background level of spontaneous AHF can be important in demonstrating that a carcinogenic agent does not possess the ability to increase the numbers of AHF above the background level, a better method to distinguish the effectiveness and relative potencies of agents as initiators or promoters is reviewed. The relative effectiveness of four different markers--gamma-glutamyltranspeptidase (GGT), a placental form of glutathione S-transferase (GST), canalicular ATPase, and glucose 6-phosphatase (G6Pase)--was described for the chemicals C.I. Solvent Yellow 14 and chlorendic acid as promoting agents in males and females. C.I. Solvent Yellow 14 is a more effective promoting agent in females than males, and AHF exhibit extremely low numbers scored by GGT. On the other hand, the numbers of AHF present in livers of male rats promoted by this agent are more than twice those seen in livers of female animals, possibly owing to the effectiveness of this agent as an initiator in the male but not the female. Very few AHF, especially in the male, are scored by GGT during chlorendic acid promotion. The distribution of phenotypes with these markers also differs in the spontaneous AHF appearing in the livers of animals fed 0.05% phenobarbital on either a crude NIH-07 or AIN-76 purified diet. Such studies emphasize the extreme dependence of the promoting stage of hepatocarcinogenesis on environmental factors of sex, diet, and the molecular nature of the promoting agent itself. The hallmark of the final stage of progression in the development of hepatocellular carcinomas is aneuploidy, which may be reflected by phenotypic heterogeneity within individual AHF, termed foci-in-foci. The implications of such quantitative analyses during hepatocarcinogenesis induced by specific agents in relation to the specific action of the agent at one or more of the stages of hepatocarcinogenesis are discussed.