ArticleAnalytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam)2016
Comparison between Manual and Automated Methods for Ki-67 Immunoexpression Quantification in Ameloblastomas.
Article in Analytical cellular pathology (Amsterdam), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automated Prognosis Marker Assessment in Breast Cancers Using BLEACH&STAIN Multiplexed Immunohistochemistry.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Xeno-free protocol for GMP-compliant manufacturing of human fetal pancreas-derived mesenchymal stem cells.Stem cell research & therapy · 2022Article
- How the variability between computer-assisted analysis procedures evaluating immune markers can influence patients' outcome prediction.Histochemistry and cell biology · 2021Article
- Co-Administration of Fendiline Hydrochloride Enhances Chemotherapeutic Efficacy of Cisplatin in Neuroblastoma Treatment.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- ki67 nuclei detection and ki67-index estimation: a novel automatic approach based on human vision modeling.BMC bioinformatics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ameloblastoma is a common and unpredictable odontogenic tumor with high relapse rates. Several studies assessing the proliferative capacity of these neoplasms have been published, mainly using the protein Ki-67. Cell counts must be completed to determine the cell proliferation rate. Multiple methods have been developed for this purpose. The most widely used method is the labeling index, which has undergone changes over time to better facilitate cell counting. Here, we compared manual cell counting methods with automated cell counting (ImmunoRatio) to determine the relative effectiveness of these methods. The results suggest that ImmunoRatio, a free software tool, may be highly advantageous and provide results similar to manual cell counting methods when used with the appropriate calibration. However, ImmunoRatio has flaws that may affect the labeling index results. Therefore, this automated cell counting method must be supplemented with manual cell counting methods.
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.