ArticleJournal of laboratory physicians
Comparison of Immunocytochemistry and Immunohistochemistry on Breast Carcinoma: A Boon or a Bane?
Article in Journal of laboratory physicians. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cellular Characterization Using Microwave-Assisted Immunocytochemistry, A Time-Efficient Alternative to Traditional Immunocytochemistry.Current protocols · 2026Article
- Detection of Estrogen Receptor Status in Breast Cancer Cytology Samples by an Optical Nanosensor.Advanced nanobiomed research · 2025Article
- Rapid differentiation of estrogen receptor status in patient biopsy breast cancer aspirates with an optical nanosensor.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Diagnostic validity of fine-needle capillary cytology in palpable tumours at the Oncology Institute of Peru.Ecancermedicalscience · 2018Article
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
introductionBreast carcinoma is the most common cancer among women in the urban Indian population. Conventionally, immunohistochemistry (IHC) is done to determine the hormone receptor status of the tumor. Immunocytochemistry (ICC) on fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) was carried out to determine the same hormone receptor status of the tumor.
objectiveThe study was undertaken to evaluate the diagnostic reliability of performing estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (Her2/neu) receptor status on FNAC by ICC and to compare the results with IHC. MATERIALS AND
methodsA 2 years 6 months prospective study conducted in the Department of Pathology, ESIC Medical College and PGIMSR and ESIC Model Hospital, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru, wherein 100 breast carcinoma patients' samples both cytology and histology were collected. IHC and ICC were done by peroxidase antiperoxidase technique. Validations of the receptor status were analyzed using sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV), and kappa statistics for agreements between ICC and IHC.
resultsICC was positive for ER, PR, and Her2/neu in 53, 50, and 22 cases, respectively. For ER, a cytohistologic correlation of 98%, with a sensitivity of 96.3%, specificity of 100%, and PPV and NPV being 100% and 95.7%. For PR, concordance of 97%, with a sensitivity of 94.3%, specificity of 100%, and PPV and NPV being 100% and 94%. Her2/neu had an agreement of 89%, with a sensitivity of 72%, specificity of 95.5%, and PPV and NPV being 85.7% and 90.1%.
conclusionICC has been a boon and can be a paramount diagnostic adjunct to the routine investigations.
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.