Literature DB >> 16435284

A new approach to the validation of tissue microarrays.

L Goethals1, C Perneel, A Debucquoy, H De Schutter, D Borghys, N Ectors, K Geboes, W H McBride, K M Haustermans.   

Abstract

Although tissue microarrays (TMA) have been widely used for a number of years, it is still not clear how many core biopsies should be taken to determine a reliable value for percentage positivity or how much heterogeneity in marker expression influences this number. The first aim of this study was to validate the human visual semi-quantitative scoring system for positive staining of tumour tissue with the exact values determined from computer-generated images. The second aim was to determine the minimum number of core biopsies needed to estimate percentage positivity reliably when the immunohistochemical staining pattern is heterogeneous and scored in a non-binary way. Tissue sections from ten colorectal cancer specimens were stained for carbonic anhydrase IX (CA IX). The staining patterns were digitized and 400 artificial computer-generated images were generated to test the accuracy of the human scoring system. To determine the minimal number of core biopsies needed to account for tumour heterogeneity, 50 (artificial) core biopsies per section were taken from the tumoural region of the ten digitally recorded full tissue sections. Based on the semi-quantitative scores from the 50 core biopsies per section, 2500 x n (n = 1-10 core biopsies) experimental core biopsies were then generated and scores recorded. After comparison with field-by-field analysis from the tumoural region of the whole tissue section, the number of core biopsies that need to be taken to minimize the influence of heterogeneity could be determined. In conclusion, visual scoring accurately estimated the percentage positivity and the percentage tumour present in a section, as judged by comparison with the artificial images. The exact number of core biopsies that has to be examined to determine tumour marker positivity using TMAs is affected by the degree of heterogeneity in the expression pattern of the protein, but for most purposes at least four is recommended.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16435284     DOI: 10.1002/path.1934

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pathol        ISSN: 0022-3417            Impact factor:   7.996


  25 in total

1.  Value of staining intensity in the interpretation of immunohistochemistry for tumor markers in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Inti Zlobec; Luigi Terracciano; Jeremy R Jass; Alessandro Lugli
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2007-08-03       Impact factor: 4.064

2.  Prognostic significance of mucins in colorectal cancer with different DNA mismatch-repair status.

Authors:  A Lugli; I Zlobec; K Baker; P Minoo; L Tornillo; L Terracciano; J R Jass
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2006-06-30       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Cell Line Macroarray: An Alternative High-Throughput Platform to Analyze hiPSC Lines.

Authors:  Alberto La Spada; Simona Baronchelli; Linda Ottoboni; Francesca Ruffini; Gianvito Martino; Nunzia Convertino; Aikaterini Ntai; Tobias Steiner; Ida Biunno; Andrea De Blasio
Journal:  J Histochem Cytochem       Date:  2016-10-26       Impact factor: 2.479

4.  Preclinical evaluation and validation of [18F]HX4, a promising hypoxia marker for PET imaging.

Authors:  Ludwig J Dubois; Natasja G Lieuwes; Marco H M Janssen; Wenny J M Peeters; Albert D Windhorst; Joseph C Walsh; Hartmuth C Kolb; Michel C Ollers; Johan Bussink; Guus A M S van Dongen; Albert van der Kogel; Philippe Lambin
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-08-23       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 gene amplification in gastric cancer using tissue microarray technology.

Authors:  Dimitrios Tsapralis; Ioannis Panayiotides; George Peros; Theodore Liakakos; Eva Karamitopoulou
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-01-14       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  CD8+ lymphocytes/ tumour-budding index: an independent prognostic factor representing a 'pro-/anti-tumour' approach to tumour host interaction in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  A Lugli; E Karamitopoulou; I Panayiotides; P Karakitsos; G Rallis; G Peros; G Iezzi; G Spagnoli; M Bihl; L Terracciano; I Zlobec
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-09-15       Impact factor: 7.640

7.  ErbB family immunohistochemical expression in colorectal cancer patients with higher risk of recurrence after radical surgery.

Authors:  Glauco Baiocchi; Ademar Lopes; Renata A Coudry; Benedito M Rossi; Fernando A Soares; Samuel Aguiar; Gustavo C Guimarães; Fabio O Ferreira; Wilson T Nakagawa
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2009-04-24       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Chemosensitivity and stratification by a five monoclonal antibody immunohistochemistry test in the NSABP B14 and B20 trials.

Authors:  Douglas T Ross; Chung-Yeul Kim; Gong Tang; Olga L Bohn; Rodney A Beck; Brian Z Ring; Robert S Seitz; Soonmyung Paik; Joseph P Costantino; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2008-10-15       Impact factor: 12.531

9.  Patched 1 Expression Correlates with Biochemical Relapse in High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Annelies Gonnissen; Sofie Isebaert; Christiaan Perneel; Chad M McKee; Filip Van Utterbeeck; Evelyne Lerut; Clare Verrill; Richard J Bryant; Steven Joniau; Ruth J Muschel; Karin Haustermans
Journal:  Am J Pathol       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 4.307

10.  TIA-1 cytotoxic granule-associated RNA binding protein improves the prognostic performance of CD8 in mismatch repair-proficient colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Inti Zlobec; Eva Karamitopoulou; Luigi Terracciano; Salvatore Piscuoglio; Giandomenica Iezzi; Manuele Giuseppe Muraro; Giulio Spagnoli; Kristi Baker; Alexandar Tzankov; Alessandro Lugli
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-12-10       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.