ArticleZhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer2015
[Influence of Immunohistochemistry Scoring Criteria in Detecting EGFR Mutations].
Article in Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nimotuzumab Combined With Concurrent Curative Radiotherapy and S-1 in 75 Years and Older Patients With Stage II-IVB Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Phase II Study.International journal of cancer · 2026Trial
- Tumor promoting effects of circRNA_001287 on renal cell carcinoma through miR-144-targeted CEP55.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2020Article
- Circ-TCF4.85 silencing inhibits cancer progression through microRNA-486-5p-targeted inhibition of ABCF2 in hepatocellular carcinoma.Molecular oncology · 2020Article
- CircRNA_000864 Upregulates B-cell Translocation Gene 2 Expression and Represses Migration and Invasion in Pancreatic Cancer Cells by Binding to miR-361-3p.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAppropriate immunohistochemistry (IHC) scoring criteria can guarantee the reliability of mutation detection results. Most current studies suggest that the "four-grade criterion" may be the best among all scoring systems. The aim of this study is to discuss the influence of different four-grade immunohistochemistry scoring criteria on the test results.
methodsThree different four-grade immunohistochemistry scoring criteria were respectively used to evaluate the EGFR status of 83 cases of non-small cell of lung cancer (NSCLC) samples. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), the agreement of each criterion compared with the gold standard, and whether statistical significance exists between each criterion were calculated.
resultsNo statistical difference was found among the three criteria in detecting EGFR mutations. All three criteria exhibit considerably better specificity than sensitivity. For samples with scores of "3+", PPV could reach up to 100%.
conclusionsNo definite best criterion is among different four-grade scoring criteria. Regardless of the kind of criterion used, the specificity of IHC method in detecting EGFR mutations is markedly better than the sensitivity. For samples with scores of "3+", mutation status can be confirmed, and samples can receive EGFR-TKI therapy directly.
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.