ArticleScientific reports2023
Validation of an on-chip p16
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing Cervical Cancer Screening: Review of p16/Ki-67 Dual Staining as a Promising Triage Strategy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
More specific screening systems for cervical cancer may become necessary as the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine becomes more widespread. Although p16/Ki-67 dual-staining cytology has several advantages, it requires advanced diagnostic skills. Here, we developed an automated on-chip immunostaining method using a microfluidic device. An electroactive microwell array (EMA) microfluidic device with patterned thin-film electrodes at the bottom of each microwell was used for single-cell capture by dielectrophoresis. Immunostaining and dual staining for p16/Ki-67 were performed on diagnosed liquid cytology samples using the EMA device. The numbers of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cells captured by the EMA device were determined and compared among the cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) lesion samples. Seven normal, fifteen CIN grade 3, and seven CIN grade 2 samples were examined. The percentage of dual-positive cells was 18.6% in the CIN grade 2 samples and 23.6% in the CIN grade 3 samples. The percentages of dual-positive staining increased significantly as the severity of the cervical lesions increased. p16/Ki67 dual immunostaining using the EMA device is as sensitive as the conventional method of confirming the histopathological diagnosis of cervical samples. This system enables a quantified parallel analysis at the individual cell level.
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.