ArticleDiagnostic pathology2026
Comparison of immunohistochemistry, PCR, and NGS for the evaluation of mismatch repair deficiency and microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer: a retrospective study.
Article in Diagnostic pathology, 2026. 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.
- Tumor-cell PD-L1 expression, mismatch repair status, and survival outcomes in colorectal carcinoma: a retrospective Pakistani cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
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
backgroundMicrosatellite instability (MSI) and mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency serves as a critical predictive biomarker for the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in colorectal cancer (CRC). However, discrepancies among detection methods may lead to inconsistent results, which may contribute to ICIs resistance. This study aimed to evaluate the concordance of MMR status and MSI assessment across three commonly used methods and to explore factors underlying discordant cases.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed MSI status in 534 CRC patients using three detection methods: immunohistochemistry (IHC) for MMR protein expression, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and next-generation sequencing (NGS) for MSI status assessment. Concordance between methods was measured using Kappa statistics, and discordant cases were further investigated.
resultsAmong the 534 cases, 7.3% (39/534) were classified as deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) by IHC, 7.5% (40/534) as MSI-H by PCR, and 7.3% (39/534) as MSI-H by NGS. The highest concordance was observed between PCR and NGS (Kappa = 0.986), followed by NGS and IHC (Kappa = 0.943), and PCR and IHC (Kappa = 0.930). Discordant results occurred in five cases (0.9%), primarily attributable to assay-specific limitations, tumor heterogeneity, technical or pre-analytical issues, and biological variability.
conclusionIHC, PCR, and NGS showed high overall concordance in MSI and MMR assessment. The small number of discordant cases highlights the inherent limitations of individual methods. While single-method testing is generally reliable, multi-platform evaluation may provide additional insights in diagnostically challenging or borderline cases.
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.