Detail
Článek
Článek online
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Comparison of immunohistochemistry, four in situ hybridization methods and quantitative polymerase chain reaction for the molecular diagnosis of HER2 status in gastric cancer: a study of 55 cases

L. Staněk, T. Rozkoš, J. Laco, A. Ryška, L. Petruželka, M. Důra, P. Dundr,

. 2014 ; 10 (5) : 2669-74.

Jazyk angličtina Země Řecko

Typ dokumentu srovnávací studie, časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc15023055

In the current study, the sensitivity and specificity of methods of HER2 status detection were studied in 55 patients presenting with gastric/gastroesophageal junction carcinoma (30 intestinal and 25 diffuse), in small biopsy (endoscopy; n=33) and resection specimens (n=22). The primary objective of the present study was to compare various methods for the assessment of HER2 status, with regards to the sensitivity and specificity of each method, as well as their concordance. In all cases, the status of HER2 was determined using immunohistochemistry (IHC), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), silver in situ hybridization (SISH), and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). The concordance rate between IHC and ISH was 100% for IHC 0 and 3+. The concordance rate for IHC 1+ was 100% between IHC and SISH, and 92.9% between IHC and FISH. The concordance rate among different FISH methods was 100%, between FISH and SISH it was 96.2%, and between qPCR and ISH methods it was 88.5%. Thus, the results demonstrate that different in situ hybridization methods are comparable and that none were superior. Furthermore, the IHC and FISH methods were found to be comparable and the concordance rate was particularly good. qPCR analysis correlated well with the other methods and appears to be a possible alternative tool for detection of the HER2 status. However, the concordance rate of qPCR with other methods was identified to be lower in the diffuse carcinoma group of endoscopy biopsy specimens; therefore investigation of further cases is required.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc15023055
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20150728125351.0
007      
ta
008      
150709s2014 gr f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.3892/mmr.2014.2530 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)25189406
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a gr
100    1_
$a Staněk, Libor $u Department of Pathology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital in Prague, CZ-128 00 Prague 2, Czech Republic.
245    10
$a Comparison of immunohistochemistry, four in situ hybridization methods and quantitative polymerase chain reaction for the molecular diagnosis of HER2 status in gastric cancer: a study of 55 cases / $c L. Staněk, T. Rozkoš, J. Laco, A. Ryška, L. Petruželka, M. Důra, P. Dundr,
520    9_
$a In the current study, the sensitivity and specificity of methods of HER2 status detection were studied in 55 patients presenting with gastric/gastroesophageal junction carcinoma (30 intestinal and 25 diffuse), in small biopsy (endoscopy; n=33) and resection specimens (n=22). The primary objective of the present study was to compare various methods for the assessment of HER2 status, with regards to the sensitivity and specificity of each method, as well as their concordance. In all cases, the status of HER2 was determined using immunohistochemistry (IHC), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), silver in situ hybridization (SISH), and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). The concordance rate between IHC and ISH was 100% for IHC 0 and 3+. The concordance rate for IHC 1+ was 100% between IHC and SISH, and 92.9% between IHC and FISH. The concordance rate among different FISH methods was 100%, between FISH and SISH it was 96.2%, and between qPCR and ISH methods it was 88.5%. Thus, the results demonstrate that different in situ hybridization methods are comparable and that none were superior. Furthermore, the IHC and FISH methods were found to be comparable and the concordance rate was particularly good. qPCR analysis correlated well with the other methods and appears to be a possible alternative tool for detection of the HER2 status. However, the concordance rate of qPCR with other methods was identified to be lower in the diffuse carcinoma group of endoscopy biopsy specimens; therefore investigation of further cases is required.
650    _2
$a adenokarcinom $x diagnóza $x metabolismus $7 D000230
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    _2
$a senioři nad 80 let $7 D000369
650    _2
$a gastroezofageální junkce $x patologie $7 D004943
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a imunohistochemie $7 D007150
650    _2
$a hybridizace in situ fluorescenční $7 D017404
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a diagnostické techniky molekulární $7 D025202
650    _2
$a kvantitativní polymerázová řetězová reakce $7 D060888
650    _2
$a receptor erbB-2 $x genetika $x metabolismus $7 D018719
650    _2
$a nádory žaludku $x diagnóza $x metabolismus $7 D013274
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Rozkoš, Tomáš $u The Fingerland Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and University Hospital in Hradec Kralove, CZ-500 05 Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Laco, Jan $u The Fingerland Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and University Hospital in Hradec Kralove, CZ-500 05 Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Ryška, Aleš $u The Fingerland Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and University Hospital in Hradec Kralove, CZ-500 05 Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Petruželka, Luboš $u Department of Oncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital in Prague, CZ-128 00 Prague 2, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Důra, Miroslav $u First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, CZ-128 00 Prague 2, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Dundr, Pavel $u Department of Pathology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague and General University Hospital in Prague, CZ-128 00 Prague 2, Czech Republic.
773    0_
$w MED00181650 $t Molecular medicine reports $x 1791-3004 $g Roč. 10, č. 5 (2014), s. 2669-74
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25189406 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20150709 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20150728125436 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1083394 $s 906048
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2014 $b 10 $c 5 $d 2669-74 $i 1791-3004 $m Molecular medicine reports $n Mol Med Rep $x MED00181650
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20150709

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace