ArticleScientific reports2024
Quantitative performance assessment of Ultivue multiplex panels in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded human and murine tumor specimens.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spatial Multiomics Reveal Insights Into ADC Efficacy.European journal of immunology · 2026Review
- Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer: Standards for Reporting of Multiplex Immunohistochemistry/Immunofluorescence Assays (STORMI).Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present a rigorous validation strategy to evaluate the performance of Ultivue multiplex immunofluorescence panels. We have quantified the accuracy and precision of four different multiplex panels (three human and one mouse) in tumor specimens with varying levels of T cell density. Our results show that Ultivue panels are typically accurate wherein the relative difference in cell proportion between a multiplex image and a 1-plex image is less than 20% for a given biomarker. Ultivue panels exhibited relatively high intra-run precision (CV ≤ 25%) and relatively low inter-run precision (CV >> 25%) which can be remedied by using local intensity thresholding to gate biomarker positivity. We also evaluated the reproducibility of cell-cell distance estimates measured from multiplex images which show high intra- and inter-run precision. We introduce a new metric, multiplex labeling efficiency, which can be used to benchmark the overall fidelity of the multiplex data across multiple batch runs. Taken together our results provide a comprehensive characterization of Ultivue panels and offer practical guidelines for analyzing multiplex images.
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.