PGDS, A Novel Technique Combining Chromogenic In Situ Hybridization and Immunohistochemistry for the Assessment of ErbB2 (HER2/neu) Status in Breast Cancer
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Given the important prognostic and predictive utility of v-erb-b2 erythroblastic leukemia viral oncogene homolog 2 (ErbB2) [human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2/neu)] in breast cancer, it is recommended that ErbB2 testing be performed on all invasive breast cancers at the time of diagnosis. A consensus, however, has not yet been reached as to the optimal method of evaluating ErbB2 status. Immunohistochemistry to detect protein overexpression and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to detect ErbB2 gene amplification are the most frequently used methods. As no one detection method fulfills all necessary requirements of reliability, reproducibility, and ease of use, we developed a novel approach in the form of a simple assay we refer to as protein and gene double staining (PGDS) which simultaneously evaluates protein overexpression and gene amplification by combining immunohistochemistry with chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH). A total of 134 invasive breast carcinomas, including 81 cases with a full-face section and 53 cases included in a tissue microarray (TMA), were assessed by PGDS, and the results were correlated with ErbB2 gene amplification status as determined by FISH. ErbB2 gene copy number determined by CISH analysis in the PGDS assay showed excellent concordance with that of FISH (correlation coefficient 0.82; P<0.001 with full-face section cases, and 0.98; P<0.001 with cases in a TMA). The overall concordance rate for gene amplification status between PGDS and FISH was 90.12% in cases with a full-face section and 92.45% with TMA cases. Perfect correlation was seen between the PGDS assay and FISH in cases that were considered either nonamplified or highly amplified by the dual assay. Of the 17 cases that showed low amplification by PGDS, 5 were classified as nonamplified by FISH. Correction for chromosome 17 copy number in the FISH assessment contributed to the discordance between CISH and FISH results. This newly developed PGDS method represents a novel approach to ErbB2 status determination that combines the assessment of both protein overexpression and gene amplification in one simple assay. It is likely that this assay will aid in immunohistochemical calibration and will also increase the sensitivity and specificity of ErbB2 testing.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».