ArticleMedical journal, Armed Forces India2020
Rapid
Article in Medical journal, Armed Forces India, 2020. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLight chain restriction needs to be established on the paraffin embedded tissue in certain types of plasma cell dyscrasias when serum levels of monoclonal immunoglobulins and light chain assays in the urine and serum may be normal. Rapid-in-situ-hybridisation (RISH) is thought to be a superior to immunohistochemistry (IHC) for kappa and lambda staining due to brighter and crisp staining without any background.
methodsFifty cases were included in this pilot study. Serum light chain restriction status of the case was taken as gold standard. The results of standard IHC for kappa and lambda immunoglobulins on the bone marrow biopsy of these cases was compared with RISH performed by the two commercially available kits. The results of the two methods were compared for sensitivity, need to repeat the test and background staining.
resultsThe study found that in IHC first run sensitivity was 58% which improved to 88% after the second run. For RISH the sensitivity was 100%.
conclusionRapid-in-situ-hybridisation (RISH) is a superior technique to IHC for detecting kappa and lambda light chain in plasma cells. The test is as labour intensive and time consuming as the routine IHC but has no background staining with more bright and crisp staining quality.
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.