ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2015
Comparison of Chromogenic In Situ Hybridization and Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization for the Evaluation of MDM2 Amplification in Adipocytic Tumors.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Validation to Refinement: Optimising a Diagnostic Score for Atypical Lipomatous Tumours and Lipomas.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Atypical Lipomatous Tumours vs. Lipomas: A Multimodal Diagnostic Approach.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Liposarcoma: A Journey into a Rare Tumor's Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Pathophysiology, and Limitations of Current Therapies.Cancers · 2024Review
- The Predictive Role of the Histopathological Scoring System in Adipose Tumors-Lipoma, Atypical Lipomatous Tumor, and Liposarcoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- MDM2 amplification is rare in gastric cancer.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2023Article
- Rare MDM2 amplification in a fat-predominant angiomyolipoma.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2020Article
- Comparison of DifferentViruses · 2018Article
- Benzene and its metabolite decreases cell proliferation via LncRNA-OBFC2A-mediated anti-proliferation effect involving NOTCH1 and KLF15.Oncotarget · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAtypical lipomatous tumor/well-differentiated liposarcoma (ALT-WDLPS) and dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS) are characterized cytogenetically by a 12q13-15 amplification involving the mouse double minute 2 (MDM2) oncogene. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is used frequently to detect this amplification and aid with the diagnosis of these entities, which is difficult by morphology alone. Recently, bright-field in situ hybridization techniques such as chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH) have been introduced for the determination of MDM2 amplification status.
methodsThe present study compared the results of FISH and CISH for detecting MDM2 amplification in 41 cases of adipocytic tumors. Amplification was defined in both techniques as a MDM2/CEN12 ratio of 2 or greater.
resultsEleven cases showed amplification with both FISH and CISH, and 26 cases showed no amplification with both methods. Two cases had discordant results between CISH and FISH, and two cases were not interpretable by CISH.
conclusionCISH is advantageous for allowing pathologists to evaluate the histologic and molecular alterations occurring simultaneously in a specimen. Moreover, CISH is found to be more cost- and time-efficient when used with automation, and the signals do not quench over time. CISH technique is a reliable alternative to FISH in the evaluation of adipocytic tumors for MDM2 amplification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.