Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Oestrogen/progesterone receptor expression in breast carcinoma is associated with good response to hormonal therapy and overall better prognosis. The predictive and prognostic capabilities of these receptors are enhanced by quantitation of immunoreaction. There are several manual and automated methods for this purpose. Whether they yield comparable results that can be used interchangeably is not yet clear.
Aim: To compare the manual methods (H-score and Allred score) with automated methods (Immunoratio) for quantifying immunohistochemical (IHC) reaction for ER/PR in breast carcinoma.
Materials And Methods: Samples from established cases of breast carcinoma were processed and stained by immunohistochemical methods to demonstrate oestrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR). Receptor expression was quantified by manual methods (H-score, modified H-score and Allred score) and automated methods (basic and advanced Immunoratio). In modified H score, the intensity of reaction was assessed by measurement of mean grey value {H (MGV)} or optical density {H (DC-OD)} of deconvoluted image. The manual counting was done with cell counter plugin of Image-J (NIH). The scores were compared and Pearson's correlation coefficient was determined.
Results: Both manual and automated methods produced results that were comparable. There was a statistically significant positive correlation among all methods (p<0.02). The strongest correlation was observed between advanced immunoratio and H (DC-OD) (p=<0.001). Basic immunoratio appeared to be less reliable than the other methods. Staining intensity measurements by various methods did not significantly affect correlation. However, intensity measurements by optical density resulted in lower H-scores but led to more reliable detection of negative immunoreaction.
Conclusion: Both manual and automated methods of quantitation are comparable. Advanced immunoratio is a reliable alternative to manual methods. Cell Counter plugin is a useful tool for manual counting and quantitation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4413070 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2015/12432.5628 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!