Estrogen Receptor Enzyme Immunoassay in Fine-Needle Aspirates from Human Breast Cancer

Authors

  • A. Borg Departments of Oncology and Cytodiagnostics, University Hospital, S-221 85, Lund, Sweden
  • M. Ferno Departments of Oncology and Cytodiagnostics, University Hospital, S-221 85, Lund, Sweden
  • I. Idvall Departments of Oncology and Cytodiagnostics, University Hospital, S-221 85, Lund, Sweden

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3109/02841868909111245

Keywords:

Breast cancer, estrogen receptor, fine-needle aspi- rate, surgical biopsy, enzyme immunoassay, radioligand assay

Abstract

An enzyme immunoassay was compared with a radioligand assay (isoelectric focusing) for estrogen receptor (ER) determination in 100 preoperative fine-needle aspirates from human breast cancer. A strong correlation (rs=0.85) between the two estimates was found. However, ER estimates by enzyme immunoassay were 6 times higher than with isoelectric focusing, mainly due to an underestimation of ER content with the latter method in highly blood-contaminated or diluted samples. Enzyme immunoassay provided adequate ER measurement even at very high (50%) blood admixture. To study the reliability of ER measurement with enzyme immunoassay in fine-needle aspirates, a comparison was made with estimates in the corresponding surgical biopsies (65 cases). With DNA as reference parameter a significant correlation (rs=0.68) was obtained. Excluding aspirates with low cellularity (<50000 cells/ml), only one ER negative fine-needle aspirate was found among 47 ER positive surgical biopsies. A few ER positive aspirates corresponded to ER negative surgical biopsies possibly due to tumour heterogeneity or the fact that fine-needle aspiration sometimes may represent a better sampling technique than surgical biopsy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

1989-01-01

How to Cite

Borg, A., Ferno, M., & Idvall, I. (1989). Estrogen Receptor Enzyme Immunoassay in Fine-Needle Aspirates from Human Breast Cancer. Acta Oncologica, 28(2), 187–191. https://doi.org/10.3109/02841868909111245