Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26659386›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Quantification of Estrogen Receptor-Alpha Expression in Human Breast Carcinomas With a Miniaturized, Low-Cost Digital Microscope: A Comparison with a High-End Whole Slide-Scanner.

Oscar Holmström, Nina Linder, Mikael Lundin, Hannu Moilanen, Antti Suutala, Riku Turkki, Heikki Joensuu, Jorma Isola, Vinod Diwan, Johan Lundin

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Oscar HolmströmInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki, Finland.
Nina LinderInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki, Finland.
Mikael LundinInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki, Finland.
Hannu MoilanenCenter of Microscopy and Nanotechnology, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Antti SuutalaInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki, Finland.
Riku TurkkiInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki, Finland.
Heikki JoensuuInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki, Finland.
Jorma IsolaBioMediTech, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland.
Vinod DiwanDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Johan LundinInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), Helsinki, Finland.
Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland · FIKarolinska Institutet · SETampere University · FIUniversity of Oulu · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA significant barrier to medical diagnostics in low-resource environments is the lack of medical care and equipment. Here we present a low-cost, cloud-connected digital microscope for applications at the point-of-care. We evaluate the performance of the device in the digital assessment of estrogen receptor-alpha (ER) expression in breast cancer samples. Studies suggest computer-assisted analysis of tumor samples digitized with whole slide-scanners may be comparable to manual scoring, here we study whether similar results can be obtained with the device presented. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 170 samples of human breast carcinoma, immunostained for ER expression, were digitized with a high-end slide-scanner and the point-of-care microscope. Corresponding regions from the samples were extracted, and ER status was determined visually and digitally. Samples were classified as ER negative (<1% ER positivity) or positive, and further into weakly (1-10% positivity) and strongly positive. Interobserver agreement (Cohen's kappa) was measured and correlation coefficients (Pearson's product-momentum) were calculated for comparison of the methods.

resultsCorrelation and interobserver agreement (r = 0.98, p < 0.001, kappa = 0.84, CI95% = 0.75-0.94) were strong in the results from both devices. Concordance of the point-of-care microscope and the manual scoring was good (r = 0.94, p < 0.001, kappa = 0.71, CI95% = 0.61-0.80), and comparable to the concordance between the slide scanner and manual scoring (r = 0.93, p < 0.001, kappa = 0.69, CI95% = 0.60-0.78). Fourteen (8%) discrepant cases between manual and device-based scoring were present with the slide scanner, and 16 (9%) with the point-of-care microscope, all representing samples of low ER expression.

conclusionsTumor ER status can be accurately quantified with a low-cost imaging device and digital image-analysis, with results comparable to conventional computer-assisted or manual scoring. This technology could potentially be expanded for other histopathological applications at the point-of-care.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsEstrogen Receptor alphaFemaleGene ExpressionHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMammary Glands, HumanMicroscopyObserver VariationPoint-of-Care SystemsReproducibility of ResultsSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedESR1 protein, humanEstrogen Receptor alpha

Identifiers

PMID26659386
PMCPMC4684374
OpenAlexW2254290662

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.