Open AccessCELL LOSS FROM THREE ESTABLISHED LINES OF THE C3H MOUSE MAMMARY TUMOR: A COMPARISON OF THE 125 I‐UdR AND THE 3 H‐TdR‐AUTORADIOGRAPHIC METHODS
Author(s) -
Dethlefsen L. A.,
Sorenson J.,
Snively J.
Publication year - 1977
Publication title -
cell proliferation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.647
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1365-2184
pISSN - 0960-7722
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2184.1977.tb00863.x
Subject(s) - mammary tumor , tumor cells , cell culture , biology , cell , complement (music) , microbiology and biotechnology , pathology , chemistry , cancer research , genetics , cancer , phenotype , medicine , complementation , breast cancer , gene
The 125 I‐UdR method for measuring cell loss from solid tumors has been re‐evaluated. The rate of tumor cell loss from three established lines (S102F, S102S and Slow) of the C3H mouse mammary tumor was determined by the 125 I‐UdRmethod and the results were compared to the estimates for cell loss as determined by the combined approach of cellular 3 H‐TdR autoradiography and volumetric growth‐rate determinations. This detailed comparison shows that the two methods complement each other but cannot substitute for one another because they give different quantitative information. The combined approach measures the flow of viable cells, as determined morphologically, from the proliferating compartment to the quiescent compartment, the quiescent compartment out of the tumor, etc., but does not evaluate the flow of degenerate cells or acellular (necrotic) debris. In contrast, the 125 I‐UdR method indicates the net flow of intact cells and/or dead cells as well as debris from the tumor as the I25 l‐labeled material is lost from the tumor, but gives limited internal information. Thus, depending on the specific experiment, an investigator could choose one or the other of the methods to answer the question. Perhaps both would be desirable at times; however, in most cases, one could not substitute one method for the other. The data from the Slow tumors also indicate that in certain tumors, the quantitative information from the 125 I‐UdR method may be quite limited, i.e. the confidence limits within an experiment as well as the replication error between experiments may be high.