Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18947395›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2008

Novel image analysis approach for quantifying expression of nuclear proteins assessed by immunohistochemistry: application to measurement of oestrogen and progesterone receptor levels in breast cancer.

Elton Rexhepaj, Donal J Brennan, Peter Holloway, Elaine W Kay, Amanda H McCann, Goran Landberg, Michael J Duffy, Karin Jirstrom, William M Gallagher

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

74 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Artificial intelligence applied to breast pathology.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Elton RexhepajUCD School of Biomolecular and Biomedical Science, UCD Conway Institute, University College Dublin, Belfield, Ireland.
Donal J Brennan
Peter Holloway
Elaine W Kay
Amanda H McCann
Goran Landberg
Michael J Duffy
Karin Jirstrom
William M Gallagher

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionManual interpretation of immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a subjective, time-consuming and variable process, with an inherent intra-observer and inter-observer variability. Automated image analysis approaches offer the possibility of developing rapid, uniform indicators of IHC staining. In the present article we describe the development of a novel approach for automatically quantifying oestrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) protein expression assessed by IHC in primary breast cancer.

methodsTwo cohorts of breast cancer patients (n = 743) were used in the study. Digital images of breast cancer tissue microarrays were captured using the Aperio ScanScope XT slide scanner (Aperio Technologies, Vista, CA, USA). Image analysis algorithms were developed using MatLab 7 (MathWorks, Apple Hill Drive, MA, USA). A fully automated nuclear algorithm was developed to discriminate tumour from normal tissue and to quantify ER and PR expression in both cohorts. Random forest clustering was employed to identify optimum thresholds for survival analysis.

resultsThe accuracy of the nuclear algorithm was initially confirmed by a histopathologist, who validated the output in 18 representative images. In these 18 samples, an excellent correlation was evident between the results obtained by manual and automated analysis (Spearman's rho = 0.9, P < 0.001). Optimum thresholds for survival analysis were identified using random forest clustering. This revealed 7% positive tumour cells as the optimum threshold for the ER and 5% positive tumour cells for the PR. Moreover, a 7% cutoff level for the ER predicted a better response to tamoxifen than the currently used 10% threshold. Finally, linear regression was employed to demonstrate a more homogeneous pattern of expression for the ER (R = 0.860) than for the PR (R = 0.681).

conclusionsIn summary, we present data on the automated quantification of the ER and the PR in 743 primary breast tumours using a novel unsupervised image analysis algorithm. This novel approach provides a useful tool for the quantification of biomarkers on tissue specimens, as well as for objective identification of appropriate cutoff thresholds for biomarker positivity. It also offers the potential to identify proteins with a homogeneous pattern of expression.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsAntineoplastic Agents, HormonalBreast NeoplasmsCarcinomaCohort StudiesEstrogen Receptor ModulatorsEstrogensFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedImmunohistochemistryMiddle AgedNeoplasm ProteinsAntineoplastic Agents, HormonalEstrogen Receptor ModulatorsEstrogensNeoplasm ProteinsNuclear ProteinsProgesteroneReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneTamoxifen

Identifiers

PMID18947395
PMCPMC2614526

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.