ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2019
Comparison of protein expression between formalin-fixed core-cut biopsies and surgical excision specimens using a novel multiplex approach.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe evaluated whether multiplex protein quantification using antibody bar-coding with photocleavable oligonucleotides (NanoString) can be applied to evaluate protein expression in breast cancer FFPE specimens. We also assessed whether diagnostic core-cuts fixed immediately at time of procedures and surgical excision sections from routinely fixed breast cancers are affected by the same fixation related differences noted using immunohistochemistry (IHC).
methodsThe expression of 26 proteins was analysed using NanoString technology in 16 pairs of FFPE breast cancer core-cuts and surgical excisions. The measurements yielded were compared with those by IHC on Ki67, PgR and HER2 biomarkers and pAKT and pERK1/2 phosphorylated proteins.
resultsWhen considered irrespective of sample type, expression measured by the two methods was strongly correlated for all markers (p < 0.001; ρ = 0.69-0.88). When core-cuts and excisions were evaluated separately, the correlations between NanoString and IHC were weaker but significant except for pAKT in excisions. Surgical excisions showed lower levels of 8/12 phosphoproteins and higher levels of 4/13 non-phosphorylated proteins in comparison to core-cuts (p < 0.01). Reduced p4EBP1, pAMPKa, pRPS6 and pRAF1 immunogenicity in excisions was correlated with tumour size and mastectomy specimens showed lower p4EBP1 and pRPS6 expression than lumpectomy (p < 0.05).
conclusionsOur study supports the validity of the new multiplex approach to protein analysis but indicates that, as with IHC, caution is necessary for the analysis in excisions particularly of phosphoproteins. The specimen type, tumour size and surgery type may lead to biases in the quantitative analysis of many proteins of biologic and clinical interest in excision specimens.
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.