Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31236139›Full record

ArticleMolecular cytogenetics2019

One-fits-all pretreatment protocol facilitating Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded, fresh frozen and cytological slides.

Shivanand O Richardson, Manon M H Huibers, Roel A de Weger, Wendy W J de Leng, John W J Hinrichs, Ruud W J Meijers, Stefan M Willems, Ton L M G Peeters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular cytogenetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Effect ofJCO precision oncology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. RT-PCR assay to detectNeuro-oncology practice · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Identification ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Shivanand O Richardson1Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4401-2359
Manon M H Huibers1Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Roel A de Weger1Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Wendy W J de Leng1Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
John W J Hinrichs1Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Ruud W J Meijers1Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Stefan M Willems1Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Ton L M G Peeters1Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH) technique is a very useful tool for diagnostic and prognostic purposes in molecular pathology. However, clinical testing on patient tissue is challenging due to variables of tissue processing that can influence the quality of the results. This emphasizes the necessity of a standardized FISH protocol with a high hybridization efficiency. We present a pretreatment protocol that is easy, reproducible, cost-effective, and facilitates FISH on all types of patient material simultaneously with good quality results.During validation, FISH analysis was performed simultaneously on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded, fresh frozen and cytological patient material in combination with commercial probes using our optimized one-fits-all pretreatment protocol. An optimally processed sample is characterized by strong specific signals, intact nuclear membranes, non-disturbing autofluorescence and a homogeneous DAPI staining.

resultsIn our retrospective cohort of 3881 patient samples, overall 93% of the FISH samples displayed good quality results leading to a patient diagnosis. All FISH were assessed on quality aspects such as adequacy and consistency of signal strength (brightness), lack of background and / or cross-hybridization signals, and additionally the presence of appropriate control signals were evaluated to assure probe accuracy. In our analysis 38 different FISH probes from 3 commercial manufacturers were used (Cytocell, Vysis and ZytoLight). The majority of the patients in this cohort displayed good signal quality and barely non-specific background fluorescence on all tissue types independent of which commercial probe was used.

conclusionThe optimized one-fits-all FISH method is robust, reliable and reproducible to deliver an accurate result for patient diagnostics in a lean workflow and cost-effective manner. This protocol can be used for widespread application in cancer and non-cancer diagnostics and research.

Indexed as

CytologicalFISHFluorescence In Situ HybridizationFormalin-fixed paraffin-embeddedFresh frozenMolecular pathologyPretreatment

Identifiers

PMID31236139
PMCPMC6580589

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.