liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Survivin Expression Quantified by Image Pro-plus Compared With Visual Assessment
Sichuan University, Institute Digest Surg, Department Colorectal Surg, W China Hospital, Chengdu 610064, Peoples R China Sichuan University, State Key Lab Biotherapy, W China Hospital, Chengdu 610064, Peoples R China .
Sichuan University, Institute Digest Surg, Department Colorectal Surg, W China Hospital, Chengdu 610064, Peoples R China Sichuan University, State Key Lab Biotherapy, W China Hospital, Chengdu 610064, Peoples R China .
Linköping University, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Oncology. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
University Skovde, Div Biomed, Sch Life Science, Skovde, Sweden .
Show others and affiliations
2009 (English)In: APPLIED IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY and MOLECULAR MORPHOLOGY, ISSN 1062-3345, Vol. 17, no 6, 530-535 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Over the past decades, immunohistochemistry has gained significance and already taken a crucial position in diagnosis of diseases and prognosis of patients. However, manual interpretation of immunohistochemistry and reproducibility of the scoring systems can be highly Subjective. In the article, the immunohistochemical staining of survivin in 98 rectal cancers was analyzed by using Image Pro-Plus (IPP) [3 parameters: density mean, area sum, and integrated optical density (IOD)] and the results were compared with visual assessment (2 parameters: intensity and percentage). The correlations between the 2 methods were examined, significant correlations were observed between density mean and staining intensity (Spearman correlation coefficient, r(s) = 0.806, P andlt; 0.001) IOD and staining intensity (r(s) = 0.9147 P andlt; 0.001) area sum and staining percentage (r(s) = 0.883, P andlt; 0.001), IOD and staining percentage (r(s) = 0.884, P andlt; 0.001). There was no significant difference between survivin expression and clinicopathologic variables (P andgt; 0.05) by visual assessment. However, by IPP analysis, both the density mean and IOD were higher in better-differentiated cancers than in worse differentiated ones (P = 0.02 and 0.03). There was a substantial agreement between the 2 methods. Density mean and IOD of IPP were representative parameters to assess the immunostaining quantification, and increased sensitivity in scoring and provided a more reliable and reproducible analysis of protein expression, especially, more information of the protein expression in relation to clinicopathologic variables can be provided by IPP analysis.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2009. Vol. 17, no 6, 530-535 p.
Keyword [en]
survivin, rectal cancer, immunohistochemistry, digital image analysis, visual assessment
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-52836DOI: 10.1097/PAI.0b013e3181a13bf2OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-52836DiVA: diva2:285596
Available from: 2010-01-12 Created: 2010-01-12 Last updated: 2014-08-27

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textLink to Journal

Authority records BETA

Sun, Xiao-Feng

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Sun, Xiao-Feng
By organisation
OncologyFaculty of Health SciencesDepartment of Oncology UHL
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 257 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf