ReviewArchives of pathology & laboratory medicine2022
A Consortium for Analytic Standardization in Immunohistochemistry.
Review in Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of deubiquitinating enzymes and their inhibitors in esophageal carcinoma (Review).International journal of oncology · 2026Review
- Ligustroflavone protects against acute kidney injury by inhibiting ferroptosis via acting on GSK3β/NRF2 signaling.International journal of molecular medicine · 2026Article
- Quantitative immunohistochemistry and the use of cellular calibrators for HER2 receptor number determination.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Exploring 14-3-3ζ: insights into its role in cancer mechanisms and future therapeutic applications.Hereditas · 2026Review
- Immunohistochemistry for PTEN testing in HR +/HER2- metastatic breast cancer.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2025Review
- Augmented reality microscopy to bridge trust between AI and pathologists.NPJ precision oncology · 2025Article
- Quantitative assessment of H&E staining for pathology: development and clinical evaluation of a novel system.Diagnostic pathology · 2024Article
- In Support of Magnani and Taylor.Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine · 2024Article
- Clinical Proteomics for Solid Organ Tissues.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
CONTEXT.—: The authors announce the launch of the Consortium for Analytic Standardization in Immunohistochemistry, funded with a grant from the National Cancer Institute. As with other laboratory testing, analytic standards are important for many different stakeholders: commercial vendors of instruments and reagents, biopharmaceutical firms, pathologists, scientists, clinical laboratories, external quality assurance organizations, and regulatory bodies. Analytic standards are customarily central to assay development, validation, and method transfer into routine assays and are critical quality assurance tools. OBJECTIVE.—: To improve immunohistochemistry (IHC) test accuracy and reproducibility by integrating analytic standards into routine practice. To accomplish this mission, the consortium has 2 mandates: (1) to experimentally determine analytic sensitivity thresholds (lower and upper limits of detection) for selected IHC assays, and (2) to inform IHC stakeholders of what analytic standards are, why they are important, and how and for what purpose they are used. The consortium will then publish the data and offer analytic sensitivity recommendations where appropriate. These mandates will be conducted in collaboration and coordination with clinical laboratories, external quality assurance programs, and pathology organizations. DATA SOURCES.—: Literature review and published external quality assurance data. CONCLUSIONS.—: Integration of analytic standards is expected to (1) harmonize and standardize IHC assays; (2) improve IHC test accuracy and reproducibility, both within and between laboratories; and (3) dramatically simplify and improve methodology transfer for new IHC protocols from published literature or clinical trials to clinical IHC laboratories.
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.