ArticleAmerican journal of clinical pathology2025
Validation of ancillary procedures on formalin liquid fixed aspiration cytologic samples: from minimum to maximum.
Article in American journal of clinical pathology, 2025. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe sought to present an alternative liquid-based cytologic (aLBC) and an agarose-based cell block (CB) preparation method for formalin-fixed fine-needle aspirations (FNAs), using breast cancer as a model, and to perform a validation procedure for immunohistochemical (IHC) assays.
methodsBetween 2024 and 2025, 18 breast cancer FNA cases were collected and processed into agarose-based CB, and by applying the dropped reaspirated monolayer dried preparation method, into aLBC. Matched formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded surgical specimens from the same patients served as gold-standard controls. Ten immunomarkers were assessed using validated IHC protocols. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status was evaluated by both IHC and dual-probe fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) according to 2023 American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guidelines. Staining intensity, percentage of positive cells, and marker concordance were analyzed across all specimen types. Diagnostic performance metrics were calculated, and intermethod agreement was assessed using Cohen's κ coefficient (κ > 0.75 considered acceptable).
resultsThe sensitivity, specificity, and either negative or positive predictive values and the accuracy values were 100% at all the tested immunostains and at the HER2 FISH assays.
conclusionsAccurate diagnosis from scant FNA material is an increasing demand in cytopathology. The validated aLBC and CB preparation methods proved to be cost-effective, efficient for ancillary testing, and reliable for IHC, even in low-cellularity samples.
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.