MGMT assessment in pituitary adenomas: comparison of different immunohistochemistry fixation chemicals
Purpose Despite the established role of O6-methyl-guanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) as a marker for temozolomide response, consensus of the most reliable method to assess MGMT expression in pituitary adenomas is still missing. Currently, immunohistochemistry (IHC) assessment of formaldehyde fixed...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Pituitary 2018-06, Vol.21 (3), p.266-273 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 273 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 266 |
container_title | Pituitary |
container_volume | 21 |
creator | Micko, Alexander S. G. Höftberger, Romana Wöhrer, Adelheid Millesi, Matthias Knosp, Engelbert Wolfsberger, Stefan |
description | Purpose
Despite the established role of O6-methyl-guanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) as a marker for temozolomide response, consensus of the most reliable method to assess MGMT expression in pituitary adenomas is still missing. Currently, immunohistochemistry (IHC) assessment of formaldehyde fixed tissue samples is most widely used in a semiquantitative description. As formaldehyde fails to completely preserve nucleic acids, RCL2, an alcohol-based formaldehyde-free fixative, has been proposed as a more reliable alternative in terms of cell stability. Furthermore, as the current method of IHC is semiquantitative and observer-dependent, pyrosequencing, an objective tool to evaluate the methylation status of the MGMT promoter, has emerged as a reliable and accurate alternative. The aim of this study was to validate the current IHC method for assessment of MGMT protein expression in pituitary adenomas.
Methods
The tissue samples of 8 macroadenomas with positive IHC MGMT expression (> 50%) were investigated: first, we compared the time dependent stability of MGMT protein expression after pituitary adenoma removal between formaldehyde vs. RCL2. Then, we compared positive IHC MGMT expression with methylated promoter status using pyrosequencing.
Results
In the first 12 h after adenoma removal, tissue samples remained MGMT positive in significantly more samples when fixated with formaldehyde than with RCL2, respectively (96 vs. 81%, p = 0.025).
Conclusion
Our data confirm that the current method using formaldehyde tissue fixation and IHC reveals stable and reliable results of MGMT assessment in pituitary adenomas. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11102-018-0862-x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5942339</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1993161716</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-11d31292f8d81a5a9c91cecb161000252cd332d90b452d98001002df97f568093</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kVFLHDEUhYO0VKv9Ab6Ugb74Mm1ukplJfBBE1BYUXxT6FrKZxI3sJNtkRrb_vnd3rajg0w3Jd27O4RByCPQ7UNr9KABAWU1B1lS2rF7tkD1oOl53gvIPeOayrbmA37vkcykPlKKKi09klykuhKJij_jry-vbypTiShlcHKsQq2UYpzCa_LcyvYtpMOW4smlYmhxKilXyVR-8d3mDD8MU0zyUMdm5G3CizIeVGQOimytrFuWAfPQ43JenuU_uLs5vz37WVzeXv85Or2orOjrWAD0HppiXvQTTGGUVWGdn0KJzyhpme85Zr-hMNDjkJhHrvep800qq-D452e5dTrPB9RYtZrPQyxwGzKOTCfr1SwxzfZ8edaME43y94OhpQU5_JldGjZmsWyxMdGkqGpRUjRRAO0S_vUEf0pQjxkNKcfTcQYsUbCmbUynZ-WczQPW6Rb1tUWOLet2iXqHm68sUz4r_tSHAtkDBp3jv8ouv3936D5haqf4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1993161716</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>MGMT assessment in pituitary adenomas: comparison of different immunohistochemistry fixation chemicals</title><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Micko, Alexander S. G. ; Höftberger, Romana ; Wöhrer, Adelheid ; Millesi, Matthias ; Knosp, Engelbert ; Wolfsberger, Stefan</creator><creatorcontrib>Micko, Alexander S. G. ; Höftberger, Romana ; Wöhrer, Adelheid ; Millesi, Matthias ; Knosp, Engelbert ; Wolfsberger, Stefan</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
Despite the established role of O6-methyl-guanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) as a marker for temozolomide response, consensus of the most reliable method to assess MGMT expression in pituitary adenomas is still missing. Currently, immunohistochemistry (IHC) assessment of formaldehyde fixed tissue samples is most widely used in a semiquantitative description. As formaldehyde fails to completely preserve nucleic acids, RCL2, an alcohol-based formaldehyde-free fixative, has been proposed as a more reliable alternative in terms of cell stability. Furthermore, as the current method of IHC is semiquantitative and observer-dependent, pyrosequencing, an objective tool to evaluate the methylation status of the MGMT promoter, has emerged as a reliable and accurate alternative. The aim of this study was to validate the current IHC method for assessment of MGMT protein expression in pituitary adenomas.
Methods
The tissue samples of 8 macroadenomas with positive IHC MGMT expression (> 50%) were investigated: first, we compared the time dependent stability of MGMT protein expression after pituitary adenoma removal between formaldehyde vs. RCL2. Then, we compared positive IHC MGMT expression with methylated promoter status using pyrosequencing.
Results
In the first 12 h after adenoma removal, tissue samples remained MGMT positive in significantly more samples when fixated with formaldehyde than with RCL2, respectively (96 vs. 81%, p = 0.025).
Conclusion
Our data confirm that the current method using formaldehyde tissue fixation and IHC reveals stable and reliable results of MGMT assessment in pituitary adenomas.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1386-341X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-7403</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11102-018-0862-x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29344904</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adenoma ; DNA methylation ; DNA methyltransferase ; Endocrinology ; Formaldehyde ; Guanine ; Human Physiology ; Immunohistochemistry ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase ; Pituitary ; Protein expression ; Temozolomide ; Tumors</subject><ispartof>Pituitary, 2018-06, Vol.21 (3), p.266-273</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2018</rights><rights>Pituitary is a copyright of Springer, (2018). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-11d31292f8d81a5a9c91cecb161000252cd332d90b452d98001002df97f568093</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-11d31292f8d81a5a9c91cecb161000252cd332d90b452d98001002df97f568093</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11102-018-0862-x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11102-018-0862-x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29344904$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Micko, Alexander S. G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Höftberger, Romana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wöhrer, Adelheid</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Millesi, Matthias</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Knosp, Engelbert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wolfsberger, Stefan</creatorcontrib><title>MGMT assessment in pituitary adenomas: comparison of different immunohistochemistry fixation chemicals</title><title>Pituitary</title><addtitle>Pituitary</addtitle><addtitle>Pituitary</addtitle><description>Purpose
Despite the established role of O6-methyl-guanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) as a marker for temozolomide response, consensus of the most reliable method to assess MGMT expression in pituitary adenomas is still missing. Currently, immunohistochemistry (IHC) assessment of formaldehyde fixed tissue samples is most widely used in a semiquantitative description. As formaldehyde fails to completely preserve nucleic acids, RCL2, an alcohol-based formaldehyde-free fixative, has been proposed as a more reliable alternative in terms of cell stability. Furthermore, as the current method of IHC is semiquantitative and observer-dependent, pyrosequencing, an objective tool to evaluate the methylation status of the MGMT promoter, has emerged as a reliable and accurate alternative. The aim of this study was to validate the current IHC method for assessment of MGMT protein expression in pituitary adenomas.
Methods
The tissue samples of 8 macroadenomas with positive IHC MGMT expression (> 50%) were investigated: first, we compared the time dependent stability of MGMT protein expression after pituitary adenoma removal between formaldehyde vs. RCL2. Then, we compared positive IHC MGMT expression with methylated promoter status using pyrosequencing.
Results
In the first 12 h after adenoma removal, tissue samples remained MGMT positive in significantly more samples when fixated with formaldehyde than with RCL2, respectively (96 vs. 81%, p = 0.025).
Conclusion
Our data confirm that the current method using formaldehyde tissue fixation and IHC reveals stable and reliable results of MGMT assessment in pituitary adenomas.</description><subject>Adenoma</subject><subject>DNA methylation</subject><subject>DNA methyltransferase</subject><subject>Endocrinology</subject><subject>Formaldehyde</subject><subject>Guanine</subject><subject>Human Physiology</subject><subject>Immunohistochemistry</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase</subject><subject>Pituitary</subject><subject>Protein expression</subject><subject>Temozolomide</subject><subject>Tumors</subject><issn>1386-341X</issn><issn>1573-7403</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kVFLHDEUhYO0VKv9Ab6Ugb74Mm1ukplJfBBE1BYUXxT6FrKZxI3sJNtkRrb_vnd3rajg0w3Jd27O4RByCPQ7UNr9KABAWU1B1lS2rF7tkD1oOl53gvIPeOayrbmA37vkcykPlKKKi09klykuhKJij_jry-vbypTiShlcHKsQq2UYpzCa_LcyvYtpMOW4smlYmhxKilXyVR-8d3mDD8MU0zyUMdm5G3CizIeVGQOimytrFuWAfPQ43JenuU_uLs5vz37WVzeXv85Or2orOjrWAD0HppiXvQTTGGUVWGdn0KJzyhpme85Zr-hMNDjkJhHrvep800qq-D452e5dTrPB9RYtZrPQyxwGzKOTCfr1SwxzfZ8edaME43y94OhpQU5_JldGjZmsWyxMdGkqGpRUjRRAO0S_vUEf0pQjxkNKcfTcQYsUbCmbUynZ-WczQPW6Rb1tUWOLet2iXqHm68sUz4r_tSHAtkDBp3jv8ouv3936D5haqf4</recordid><startdate>20180601</startdate><enddate>20180601</enddate><creator>Micko, Alexander S. G.</creator><creator>Höftberger, Romana</creator><creator>Wöhrer, Adelheid</creator><creator>Millesi, Matthias</creator><creator>Knosp, Engelbert</creator><creator>Wolfsberger, Stefan</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180601</creationdate><title>MGMT assessment in pituitary adenomas: comparison of different immunohistochemistry fixation chemicals</title><author>Micko, Alexander S. G. ; Höftberger, Romana ; Wöhrer, Adelheid ; Millesi, Matthias ; Knosp, Engelbert ; Wolfsberger, Stefan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-11d31292f8d81a5a9c91cecb161000252cd332d90b452d98001002df97f568093</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Adenoma</topic><topic>DNA methylation</topic><topic>DNA methyltransferase</topic><topic>Endocrinology</topic><topic>Formaldehyde</topic><topic>Guanine</topic><topic>Human Physiology</topic><topic>Immunohistochemistry</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase</topic><topic>Pituitary</topic><topic>Protein expression</topic><topic>Temozolomide</topic><topic>Tumors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Micko, Alexander S. G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Höftberger, Romana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wöhrer, Adelheid</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Millesi, Matthias</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Knosp, Engelbert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wolfsberger, Stefan</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Pituitary</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Micko, Alexander S. G.</au><au>Höftberger, Romana</au><au>Wöhrer, Adelheid</au><au>Millesi, Matthias</au><au>Knosp, Engelbert</au><au>Wolfsberger, Stefan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>MGMT assessment in pituitary adenomas: comparison of different immunohistochemistry fixation chemicals</atitle><jtitle>Pituitary</jtitle><stitle>Pituitary</stitle><addtitle>Pituitary</addtitle><date>2018-06-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>266</spage><epage>273</epage><pages>266-273</pages><issn>1386-341X</issn><eissn>1573-7403</eissn><abstract>Purpose
Despite the established role of O6-methyl-guanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) as a marker for temozolomide response, consensus of the most reliable method to assess MGMT expression in pituitary adenomas is still missing. Currently, immunohistochemistry (IHC) assessment of formaldehyde fixed tissue samples is most widely used in a semiquantitative description. As formaldehyde fails to completely preserve nucleic acids, RCL2, an alcohol-based formaldehyde-free fixative, has been proposed as a more reliable alternative in terms of cell stability. Furthermore, as the current method of IHC is semiquantitative and observer-dependent, pyrosequencing, an objective tool to evaluate the methylation status of the MGMT promoter, has emerged as a reliable and accurate alternative. The aim of this study was to validate the current IHC method for assessment of MGMT protein expression in pituitary adenomas.
Methods
The tissue samples of 8 macroadenomas with positive IHC MGMT expression (> 50%) were investigated: first, we compared the time dependent stability of MGMT protein expression after pituitary adenoma removal between formaldehyde vs. RCL2. Then, we compared positive IHC MGMT expression with methylated promoter status using pyrosequencing.
Results
In the first 12 h after adenoma removal, tissue samples remained MGMT positive in significantly more samples when fixated with formaldehyde than with RCL2, respectively (96 vs. 81%, p = 0.025).
Conclusion
Our data confirm that the current method using formaldehyde tissue fixation and IHC reveals stable and reliable results of MGMT assessment in pituitary adenomas.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>29344904</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11102-018-0862-x</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1386-341X |
ispartof | Pituitary, 2018-06, Vol.21 (3), p.266-273 |
issn | 1386-341X 1573-7403 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5942339 |
source | SpringerLink Journals |
subjects | Adenoma DNA methylation DNA methyltransferase Endocrinology Formaldehyde Guanine Human Physiology Immunohistochemistry Medicine Medicine & Public Health O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase Pituitary Protein expression Temozolomide Tumors |
title | MGMT assessment in pituitary adenomas: comparison of different immunohistochemistry fixation chemicals |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T06%3A26%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=MGMT%20assessment%20in%20pituitary%20adenomas:%20comparison%20of%20different%20immunohistochemistry%20fixation%20chemicals&rft.jtitle=Pituitary&rft.au=Micko,%20Alexander%20S.%20G.&rft.date=2018-06-01&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=266&rft.epage=273&rft.pages=266-273&rft.issn=1386-341X&rft.eissn=1573-7403&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11102-018-0862-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1993161716%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1993161716&rft_id=info:pmid/29344904&rfr_iscdi=true |