ReviewLaboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology2018
Use of multicolor fluorescence in situ hybridization to detect deletions in clinical tissue sections.
Review in Laboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intratumoral heterogeneity of CDKN2A deletions in IDH-mutant astrocytoma.Brain tumor pathology · 2024Article
- CCND1 Amplification in Breast Cancer -associations With Proliferation, Histopathological Grade, Molecular Subtype and Prognosis.Journal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia · 2022Article
- Clinical application and importance of one-step human CYP2C19 genotype detection.The Journal of international medical research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A variety of laboratory methods are available for the detection of deletions of tumor suppressor genes and losses of their proteins. The clinical utility of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for the identification of deletions of tumor suppressor genes has previously been limited by difficulties in the interpretation of FISH signal patterns. The first deletion FISH assays using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue sections had to deal with a significant background level of signal losses affecting nuclei that are truncated by the cutting process of slide preparation. Recently, more efficient probe designs, incorporating probes adjacent to the tumor suppressor gene of interest, have increased the accuracy of FISH deletion assays so that true chromosomal deletions can be readily distinguished from the false signal losses caused by sectioning artifacts. This mini-review discusses the importance of recurrent tumor suppressor gene deletions in human cancer and reviews the common FISH methods being used to detect the genomic losses encountered in clinical specimens. The use of new probe designs to recognize truncation artifacts is illustrated with a four-color PTEN FISH set optimized for prostate cancer tissue sections. Data are presented to show that when section thickness is reduced, the frequency of signal truncation losses is increased. We also provide some general guidelines that will help pathologists and cytogeneticists run routine deletion FISH assays and recognize sectioning artifacts. Finally, we summarize how recently developed sequence-based approaches are being used to identify recurrent deletions using small DNA samples from tumors.
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.