Skip to main content
NCBI home page
British Journal of Cancer logoLink to British Journal of Cancer
. 1999 Nov;81(6):1088–1093. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6690811

Reproducibility of microvessel counts in breast cancer specimens

L P Marson 1, K M Kurian 3, W R Miller 2, J M Dixon 1
PMCID: PMC2362946  PMID: 10576669

Abstract

Assessment of tumour vascularity in core biopsy specimens may be a useful predictor of response to primary therapy. This study addresses practical methodological issues regarding accuracy of tumour vascularity assessments in different breast cancer specimens. Issues addressed in the study are variation caused by (i) inherent observer variation in the method, (ii) tumour heterogeneity and (iii) previous surgical manipulation of tumours. Microvessel counts were performed by two observers on separate occasions and by two different observers. Counts were performed on core biopsies and tumour sections taken simultaneously (n = 16) and with an intervening time interval (n = 21). In addition core biopsies were obtained from the same tumour on two separate occasions (n = 10). A highly significant correlation was found in counts performed by the same observers at different times and between two different observers. No significant correlation was found in counts of core biopsies and tumour sections taken either simultaneously or subsequently. No correlation was found between counts of sequential core biopsies. Study findings suggest that, although microvessel counts may be assessed reproducibly by the same and different observers, counts performed in core biopsies do not accurately reflect those of overall tumour, limiting their potential as predictive or prognostic markers. © 1999 Cancer Research Campaign

Keywords: core biopsy, microvessel count, angiogenesis

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (309.4 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Axelsson K., Ljung B. M., Moore D. H., 2nd, Thor A. D., Chew K. L., Edgerton S. M., Smith H. S., Mayall B. H. Tumor angiogenesis as a prognostic assay for invasive ductal breast carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995 Jul 5;87(13):997–1008. doi: 10.1093/jnci/87.13.997. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bergers E., van Diest P. J., Baak J. P. Tumour heterogeneity of DNA cell cycle variables in breast cancer measured by flow cytometry. J Clin Pathol. 1996 Nov;49(11):931–937. doi: 10.1136/jcp.49.11.931. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cordell J. L., Falini B., Erber W. N., Ghosh A. K., Abdulaziz Z., MacDonald S., Pulford K. A., Stein H., Mason D. Y. Immunoenzymatic labeling of monoclonal antibodies using immune complexes of alkaline phosphatase and monoclonal anti-alkaline phosphatase (APAAP complexes). J Histochem Cytochem. 1984 Feb;32(2):219–229. doi: 10.1177/32.2.6198355. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Costello P., McCann A., Carney D. N., Dervan P. A. Prognostic significance of microvessel density in lymph node negative breast carcinoma. Hum Pathol. 1995 Nov;26(11):1181–1184. doi: 10.1016/0046-8177(95)90190-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Daidone M. G., Orefice S., Mastore M., Santoro G., Salvadori B., Silvestrini R. Comparing core needle to surgical biopsies in breast cancer for cell kinetic and ploidy studies. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1991 Sep;19(1):33–37. doi: 10.1007/BF01975202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Folkman J. Angiogenesis and breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1994 Mar;12(3):441–443. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1994.12.3.441. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis: therapeutic implications. N Engl J Med. 1971 Nov 18;285(21):1182–1186. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197111182852108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Folkman J. What is the evidence that tumors are angiogenesis dependent? J Natl Cancer Inst. 1990 Jan 3;82(1):4–6. doi: 10.1093/jnci/82.1.4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fox S. B., Leek R. D., Weekes M. P., Whitehouse R. M., Gatter K. C., Harris A. L. Quantitation and prognostic value of breast cancer angiogenesis: comparison of microvessel density, Chalkley count, and computer image analysis. J Pathol. 1995 Nov;177(3):275–283. doi: 10.1002/path.1711770310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Gasparini G., Weidner N., Bevilacqua P., Maluta S., Dalla Palma P., Caffo O., Barbareschi M., Boracchi P., Marubini E., Pozza F. Tumor microvessel density, p53 expression, tumor size, and peritumoral lymphatic vessel invasion are relevant prognostic markers in node-negative breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 1994 Mar;12(3):454–466. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1994.12.3.454. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Hansen S., Grabau D. A., Rose C., Bak M., Sørensen F. B. Angiogenesis in breast cancer: a comparative study of the observer variability of methods for determining microvessel density. Lab Invest. 1998 Dec;78(12):1563–1573. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Horak E. R., Leek R., Klenk N., LeJeune S., Smith K., Stuart N., Greenall M., Stepniewska K., Harris A. L. Angiogenesis, assessed by platelet/endothelial cell adhesion molecule antibodies, as indicator of node metastases and survival in breast cancer. Lancet. 1992 Nov 7;340(8828):1120–1124. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(92)93150-l. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Jacobs T. W., Siziopikou K. P., Prioleau J. E., Raza S., Baum J. K., Hayes D. F., Schnitt S. J. Do prognostic marker studies on core needle biopsy specimens of breast carcinoma accurately reflect the marker status of the tumor? Mod Pathol. 1998 Mar;11(3):259–264. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Jannink I., Risberg B., Van Diest P. J., Baak J. P. Heterogeneity of mitotic activity in breast cancer. Histopathology. 1996 Nov;29(5):421–428. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2559.1996.d01-509.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Jensen V., Ladekarl M. Immunohistochemical quantitation of oestrogen receptors and proliferative activity in oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer. J Clin Pathol. 1995 May;48(5):429–432. doi: 10.1136/jcp.48.5.429. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Martin L., Green B., Renshaw C., Lowe D., Rudland P., Leinster S. J., Winstanley J. Examining the technique of angiogenesis assessment in invasive breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 1997;76(8):1046–1054. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1997.506. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Martin L., Holcombe C., Green B., Leinster S. J., Winstanley J. Is a histological section representative of whole tumour vascularity in breast cancer? Br J Cancer. 1997;76(1):40–43. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1997.333. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Minkowitz S., Moskowitz R., Khafif R. A., Alderete M. N. TRU-CUT needle biopsy of the breast. An analysis of its specificity and sensitivity. Cancer. 1986 Jan 15;57(2):320–323. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19860115)57:2<320::aid-cncr2820570221>3.0.co;2-c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Parums D. V., Cordell J. L., Micklem K., Heryet A. R., Gatter K. C., Mason D. Y. JC70: a new monoclonal antibody that detects vascular endothelium associated antigen on routinely processed tissue sections. J Clin Pathol. 1990 Sep;43(9):752–757. doi: 10.1136/jcp.43.9.752. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Van Hoef M. E., Knox W. F., Dhesi S. S., Howell A., Schor A. M. Assessment of tumour vascularity as a prognostic factor in lymph node negative invasive breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 1993;29A(8):1141–1145. doi: 10.1016/s0959-8049(05)80304-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Vermeulen P. B., Gasparini G., Fox S. B., Toi M., Martin L., McCulloch P., Pezzella F., Viale G., Weidner N., Harris A. L. Quantification of angiogenesis in solid human tumours: an international consensus on the methodology and criteria of evaluation. Eur J Cancer. 1996 Dec;32A(14):2474–2484. doi: 10.1016/s0959-8049(96)00379-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Vermeulen P. B., Libura M., Libura J., O'Neill P. J., van Dam P., Van Marck E., Van Oosterom A. T., Dirix L. Y. Influence of investigator experience and microscopic field size on microvessel density in node-negative breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1997 Jan;42(2):165–172. doi: 10.1023/a:1005737524541. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Weidner N., Folkman J., Pozza F., Bevilacqua P., Allred E. N., Moore D. H., Meli S., Gasparini G. Tumor angiogenesis: a new significant and independent prognostic indicator in early-stage breast carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1992 Dec 16;84(24):1875–1887. doi: 10.1093/jnci/84.24.1875. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Weidner N., Semple J. P., Welch W. R., Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis and metastasis--correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 1991 Jan 3;324(1):1–8. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199101033240101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. de Jong J. S., van Diest P. J., Baak J. P. Heterogeneity and reproducibility of microvessel counts in breast cancer. Lab Invest. 1995 Dec;73(6):922–926. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from British Journal of Cancer are provided here courtesy of Cancer Research UK

RESOURCES