Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35596629›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2022

Simple IHC reveals complex MMR alternations than PCR assays: Validation by LCM and next-generation sequencing.

Kenji Amemiya, Yosuke Hirotsu, Yuki Nagakubo, Shunsuke Watanabe, Saki Amemiya, Hitoshi Mochizuki, Toshio Oyama, Tetsuo Kondo, Masao Omata

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kenji AmemiyaDivision of Genetics and Clinical Laboratory, Yamanashi Cental Hospital, Yamanashi, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4223-0528
Yosuke HirotsuDivision of Genetics and Clinical Laboratory, Yamanashi Cental Hospital, Yamanashi, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8002-834X
Yuki NagakuboDivision of Genetics and Clinical Laboratory, Yamanashi Cental Hospital, Yamanashi, Japan.
Shunsuke WatanabeDepartment of Pathology, Yamanashi Central Hospital, Yamanashi, Japan.
Saki AmemiyaDepartment of Pathology, Yamanashi Central Hospital, Yamanashi, Japan.
Hitoshi MochizukiGenome Analysis Center, Yamanashi Cental Hospital, Yamanashi, Japan.
Toshio OyamaDepartment of Pathology, Yamanashi Central Hospital, Yamanashi, Japan.
Tetsuo KondoDepartment of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Yamanashi, Yamanashi, Japan.
Masao OmataDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yamanashi Central Hospital, Yamanashi, Japan.
University of Yamanashi Hospital · JPYamanashi Prefectural Central Hospital · JPUniversity of Tokyo Hospital · JPUniversity of Yamanashi · JP

Funding

a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) 20H03668a Research Grant for Young ScholarsGrant-in-Aid for research from the Charitable Trust Laboratory Medicine Research Foundation of JapanGrant-in-Aid for research from the Japanese Society of Clinical CytologyGrant-in-Aid for the Genome Research Project from Yamanashi PrefectureMedical Research Grants from the Takeda Science FoundationThe Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) KAKENHI Early-Career Scientists JP18K16292The Kurozumi Medical Foundationthe Uehara Memorial Foundationthe YASUDA Medical Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evaluation of the status of mismatch repair (MMR) in tumors is crucial for determining the application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Conventional PCR (MSI-PCR) is the gold standard for confirming the MMR status. However, it requires visual confirmation and presents difficulties in determining MMR status. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a simple method and can confirming MMR protein expression in the whole tumor. We aim to investigate IHC is more suitable for evaluating MMR status in the tumor. We compared MSI-PCR and IHC by testing 319 samples from 284 patients across 14 cancer types. In discordant cases, we performed laser-capture microdissection and microsatellite instability assay by next-generation sequencing (MSI-NGS). The concordance rate between IHC and MSI-PCR testing was 98.1% (313/319). Two reasons for these discrepancies were ambiguous MSI-PCR results and heterogeneous MSI status within the tumor. Among six cases (1.9%), three were judged as MSI-H by MSI-PCR but with proficient MMR by IHC. The results of MSI-NGS revealed microsatellite stable in these three cases. The remaining three cases, two of three were MSI-H and one was MSS in whole tumor in MSI-PCR. IHC showed a "mosaic" pattern containing both proficient MMR and deficient MMR portions by IHC in all three cases. We performed microdissection and MSI-PCR and found intratumoral heterogeneity of MMR status. These results indicated the advantages of IHC and performed expanded samples (n = 1082) and two additional mosaic cases were identified. Our results clearly indicated that simple IHC is the best choice for determining MMR alterations in critical cases for ICIs treatment.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsNeoplasmsDNA Mismatch RepairHumansImmunohistochemistryMicrosatellite InstabilityPolymerase Chain ReactionheterogeneityimmunohistochemistryMMRMSInext-generation sequencing

Identifiers

PMID35596629
PMCPMC9741978
OpenAlexW4281253234

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.