Diagnostic cytopathology · 2016
Immunocytochemical utility of claudin-4 versus those of Ber-EP4 and MOC-31 in effusion cytology.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Oda Tomohiro, Ogata Sho, Kawaguchi Saki, Minabe Shinya, Dokyu Misaki, Takahashi Hiromi, Kumazawa Fumihiko, Shimazaki Hideyuki, Takano Masashi, Hase Kazuo, Ozeki Yuichi, Kanoh Soichiro, Nakanishi Kuniaki
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Recently, claudin-4 (CL4) immunocytochemistry was reported to be useful for differential diagnosis in effusion cytology. We wondered whether CL4 might be useful for "single-shot" identification of metastatic carcinoma. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of CL4 in effusion cytology.
METHODS: In total, 266 cases (169 metastatic carcinomas, eight malignant mesotheliomas, and 89 reactive mesothelial cells) were selected. Immunocytochemical examinations of cell-block sections were performed for CL4, Ber-EP4, and MOC-31. We used an arbitrary 4-tiered scale based on both staining intensity and positive-cell percentage among all target cells, and calculated a staining index score (sum of the above two scores).
RESULTS: In a ROC-curve analysis, higher area-under-curve values were found for CL4 than for Ber-EP4 or MOC-31 (0.982, 0.942, and 0.926, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Since CL4 exhibited similar or superior usefulness to Ber-EP4 and MOC-31, it could become the first choice for the above differential diagnosis in effusion cytology. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2016;44:499-504. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
METHODS: In total, 266 cases (169 metastatic carcinomas, eight malignant mesotheliomas, and 89 reactive mesothelial cells) were selected. Immunocytochemical examinations of cell-block sections were performed for CL4, Ber-EP4, and MOC-31. We used an arbitrary 4-tiered scale based on both staining intensity and positive-cell percentage among all target cells, and calculated a staining index score (sum of the above two scores).
RESULTS: In a ROC-curve analysis, higher area-under-curve values were found for CL4 than for Ber-EP4 or MOC-31 (0.982, 0.942, and 0.926, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Since CL4 exhibited similar or superior usefulness to Ber-EP4 and MOC-31, it could become the first choice for the above differential diagnosis in effusion cytology. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2016;44:499-504. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.