ArticlePloS one2015
Molecular and Immunohistochemical Characterization of Historical Long-Term Preserved Fixed Tissues from Different Human Organs.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Voices from the past: results of the ESP history of pathology working group survey on pathology museums.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2022Article
- Article
- Restoration of an academic historical gross pathology collection-refreshed impact on current medical teaching?Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
University and museum collections are very important sources of biological samples that can be used to asses the past and present genetic diversity of many species. Modern genetic and immunohistochemical techniques can be used on long-term preserved fixed tissues from museum specimens to answer epidemiological questions. A proof of principle was established to apply modern molecular genetics and immunohistochemical methods to these old specimens and to verify the original diagnosis. We analysed 19 specimens from our university collection including human organs that had been in fixative for more than 80 years. The tissues originated from lung, colon, brain, heart, adrenal gland, uterus and skin. We isolated amplifiable DNA from these wet preparations and performed mutational analysis of BRAF, KRAS and EGFR. The tissues were also embedded in paraffin and used for modern histology and immunohistochemistry. Our data show that amplifiable DNA is extractable and ranged from 0.25 to 22.77 μg of total DNA. In three specimens BRAFV600E or KRASG12D mutations were found. Additionally, expression of different proteins like vimentin and GFAP was detected immunohistochemical in six investigated specimens. On the basis of our results the original diagnosis was altered in three specimens. Our work showed that it is possible to extract amplifiable DNA suitable for sequence analysis from long-term fixed tissue. Furthermore, histology and immunohistochemistry is feasible in specimens fixed long time ago. We conclude that these old preparations are suitable for further epidemiological research and that our methods open up new opportunities for future studies.
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.