Validation of tissue microarray immunohistochemistry staining and interpretation in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Tissue microarrays (TMAs) show concordance with whole tissue sections in the immunohistochemical evaluation of tumor cells. However, potential inter-institutional variability among observers and immunohistochemical staining methods has not been fully addressed. We selected 21 cases of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) to process for TMAs. Immunohistochemical stains were performed in 3 laboratories, and reviewed independently by 3 hematopathologists at the 3 institutions. Stains were scored on a 4-point scale. Statistical analyses of variation in the scoring among observers and among different institutions' stains were performed. Stains for CD3, CD10, CD20, BCL-2, BCL-6, MIB-1, and FOX-P1 revealed little variation among observers, with an average 51-82% complete agreement and 82-100% agreement +/- 1 numerical score. The rate of concordance when evaluating most stains performed in different laboratories was also relatively good, with an average of 55-72% complete agreement and 70-97% agreement +/- 1 score. However, scoring of MUM-1 and p53 stains showed wider variation, with an average of only 37 and 30% complete agreement among observers, and 11 and 45% agreement when stains from different institutions were examined. Further statistical analyses were performed to compare the observers' scoring of their own institution's stains (self-review) vs. observers' scoring of other institutions' stains (non-self). The agreement rate for the p53 stain was significantly higher when based on self-review (average 58% complete agreement) compared with an agreement rate of only 10.5% when based on a review of stains performed in another laboratory, non-self review, P < 0.01. This difference in the self- vs. non-self review was not seen when data for MUM-1 were analysed. In conclusion, most phenotypic markers used in the analysis of DLBCL can be evaluated in TMAs with adequate agreement among observers and laboratories. These include CD3, CD20, CD10, BCL-2, BCL-6, MIB-1, and FOX-P1. However, some markers, such as p53 and MUM-1, are more prone to inter-institutional variation. Variations in interpretation can be partially overcome by self-adjusted/adapt tendency, as seen with p53. Especially with newly developed markers, such as MUM-1, the development of standardized techniques for staining and interpretation is critical to reduce inter-observer variability.
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.
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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| 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 découle