Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24213463›Full record

ArticleCancers2012

Automated Quantitative Analysis of p53, Cyclin D1, Ki67 and pERK Expression in Breast Carcinoma Does Not Differ from Expert Pathologist Scoring and Correlates with Clinico-Pathological Characteristics.

Jamaica D Cass, Sonal Varma, Andrew G Day, Waheed Sangrar, Ashish B Rajput, Leda H Raptis, Jeremy Squire, Yolanda Madarnas, Sandip K Sengupta, Bruce E Elliott

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Deep Learning-Based H-Score Quantification of Immunohistochemistry-Stained Images.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jamaica D CassDivision of Cancer Biology and Genetics, Cancer Research Institute, Queen's University, Kingston K7L 3N6, Canada. elliottb@queensu.ca.
Sonal Varma
Andrew G Day
Waheed Sangrar
Ashish B Rajput
Leda H Raptis
Jeremy Squire
Yolanda Madarnas
Sandip K Sengupta
Bruce E Elliott
Queen's University · CAKingston General Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is critical need for improved biomarker assessment platforms which integrate traditional pathological parameters (TNM stage, grade and ER/PR/HER2 status) with molecular profiling, to better define prognostic subgroups or systemic treatment response. One roadblock is the lack of semi-quantitative methods which reliably measure biomarker expression. Our study assesses reliability of automated immunohistochemistry (IHC) scoring compared to manual scoring of five selected biomarkers in a tissue microarray (TMA) of 63 human breast cancer cases, and correlates these markers with clinico-pathological data. TMA slides were scanned into an Ariol Imaging System, and histologic (H) scores (% positive tumor area x staining intensity 0-3) were calculated using trained algorithms. H scores for all five biomarkers concurred with pathologists' scores, based on Pearson correlation coefficients (0.80-0.90) for continuous data and Kappa statistics (0.55-0.92) for positive vs. negative stain. Using continuous data, significant association of pERK expression with absence of LVI (p = 0.005) and lymph node negativity (p = 0.002) was observed. p53 over-expression, characteristic of dysfunctional p53 in cancer, and Ki67 were associated with high grade (p = 0.032 and 0.0007, respectively). Cyclin D1 correlated inversely with ER/PR/HER2-ve (triple negative) tumors (p = 0.0002). Thus automated quantitation of immunostaining concurs with pathologists' scoring, and provides meaningful associations with clinico-pathological data.

Identifiers

PMID24213463
PMCPMC3712710
OpenAlexW1988717588

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.