Scoring mechanisms of p16INK4a immunohistochemistry based on either independent nucleic stain or mixed cytoplasmic with nucleic expression can significantly signal to distinguish between endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas in a tissue microarray study

Chiew Loon Koo, Lai Fong Kok, Ming Yung Lee, Tina S. Wu, Ya Wen Cheng, Jeng Dong Hsu, Alexandra Ruan, Kuan Chong Chao, Chih Ping Han

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

68 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Endocervical adenocarcinomas (ECAs) and endometrial adenocarcinomas (EMAs) are malignancies that affect uterus; however, their biological behaviors are quite different. This distinction has clinical significance, because the appropriate therapy may depend on the site of tumor origin. The purpose of this study is to evaluate 3 different scoring mechanisms of p16INK4a immunohistochemical (IHC) staining in distinguishing between primary ECAs and EMAs. Methods: A tissue microarray (TMA) was constructed using formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue from hysterectomy specimens, including 14 ECAs and 24 EMAs. Tissue array sections were immunostained with a commercially available antibody of p16INK4a. Avidin-biotin complex (ABC) method was used for antigens visualization. The staining intensity and area extent of the IHC reactions was evaluated using the semi-quantitative scoring system. The 3 scoring methods were defined on the bases of the following: (1) independent cytoplasmic staining alone (Method C), (2) independent nucleic staining alone (Method N), and (3) mean of the sum of cytoplasmic score plus nucleic score (Method Mean of C plus N). Results: Of the 3 scoring mechanisms for p16INK4a expression, Method N and Method Mean of C plus N showed significant (p-values <0.05), but Method C showed non-significant (p = 0.245) frequency differences between ECAs and EMAs. In addition, Method Mean of C plus N had the highest overall accuracy rate (81.6%) for diagnostic distinction among these 3 scoring methods. Conclusion: According to the data characteristics and test effectiveness in this study, Method N and Method Mean of C plus N can significantly signal to distinguish between ECAs and EMAs; while Method C cannot do. Method Mean of C plus N is the most promising and favorable means among the three scoring mechanisms.

Original languageEnglish
Article number25
JournalJournal of Translational Medicine
Volume7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 14 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Microarrays
Adenocarcinoma
Coloring Agents
Immunohistochemistry
Tissue
Avidin
Biotin
Paraffin
Formaldehyde
Tumors
Visualization
Antigens
Staining and Labeling
Antibodies
Research Design
Hysterectomy
Uterus
Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Scoring mechanisms of p16INK4a immunohistochemistry based on either independent nucleic stain or mixed cytoplasmic with nucleic expression can significantly signal to distinguish between endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas in a tissue microarray study. / Koo, Chiew Loon; Kok, Lai Fong; Lee, Ming Yung; Wu, Tina S.; Cheng, Ya Wen; Hsu, Jeng Dong; Ruan, Alexandra; Chao, Kuan Chong; Han, Chih Ping.

In: Journal of Translational Medicine, Vol. 7, 25, 14.04.2009.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8f1130e6c61a45c0b3cf5e232de8e1ee,
title = "Scoring mechanisms of p16INK4a immunohistochemistry based on either independent nucleic stain or mixed cytoplasmic with nucleic expression can significantly signal to distinguish between endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas in a tissue microarray study",
abstract = "Background: Endocervical adenocarcinomas (ECAs) and endometrial adenocarcinomas (EMAs) are malignancies that affect uterus; however, their biological behaviors are quite different. This distinction has clinical significance, because the appropriate therapy may depend on the site of tumor origin. The purpose of this study is to evaluate 3 different scoring mechanisms of p16INK4a immunohistochemical (IHC) staining in distinguishing between primary ECAs and EMAs. Methods: A tissue microarray (TMA) was constructed using formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue from hysterectomy specimens, including 14 ECAs and 24 EMAs. Tissue array sections were immunostained with a commercially available antibody of p16INK4a. Avidin-biotin complex (ABC) method was used for antigens visualization. The staining intensity and area extent of the IHC reactions was evaluated using the semi-quantitative scoring system. The 3 scoring methods were defined on the bases of the following: (1) independent cytoplasmic staining alone (Method C), (2) independent nucleic staining alone (Method N), and (3) mean of the sum of cytoplasmic score plus nucleic score (Method Mean of C plus N). Results: Of the 3 scoring mechanisms for p16INK4a expression, Method N and Method Mean of C plus N showed significant (p-values <0.05), but Method C showed non-significant (p = 0.245) frequency differences between ECAs and EMAs. In addition, Method Mean of C plus N had the highest overall accuracy rate (81.6{\%}) for diagnostic distinction among these 3 scoring methods. Conclusion: According to the data characteristics and test effectiveness in this study, Method N and Method Mean of C plus N can significantly signal to distinguish between ECAs and EMAs; while Method C cannot do. Method Mean of C plus N is the most promising and favorable means among the three scoring mechanisms.",
author = "Koo, {Chiew Loon} and Kok, {Lai Fong} and Lee, {Ming Yung} and Wu, {Tina S.} and Cheng, {Ya Wen} and Hsu, {Jeng Dong} and Alexandra Ruan and Chao, {Kuan Chong} and Han, {Chih Ping}",
year = "2009",
month = "4",
day = "14",
doi = "10.1186/1479-5876-7-25",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
journal = "Journal of Translational Medicine",
issn = "1479-5876",
publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Scoring mechanisms of p16INK4a immunohistochemistry based on either independent nucleic stain or mixed cytoplasmic with nucleic expression can significantly signal to distinguish between endocervical and endometrial adenocarcinomas in a tissue microarray study

AU - Koo, Chiew Loon

AU - Kok, Lai Fong

AU - Lee, Ming Yung

AU - Wu, Tina S.

AU - Cheng, Ya Wen

AU - Hsu, Jeng Dong

AU - Ruan, Alexandra

AU - Chao, Kuan Chong

AU - Han, Chih Ping

PY - 2009/4/14

Y1 - 2009/4/14

N2 - Background: Endocervical adenocarcinomas (ECAs) and endometrial adenocarcinomas (EMAs) are malignancies that affect uterus; however, their biological behaviors are quite different. This distinction has clinical significance, because the appropriate therapy may depend on the site of tumor origin. The purpose of this study is to evaluate 3 different scoring mechanisms of p16INK4a immunohistochemical (IHC) staining in distinguishing between primary ECAs and EMAs. Methods: A tissue microarray (TMA) was constructed using formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue from hysterectomy specimens, including 14 ECAs and 24 EMAs. Tissue array sections were immunostained with a commercially available antibody of p16INK4a. Avidin-biotin complex (ABC) method was used for antigens visualization. The staining intensity and area extent of the IHC reactions was evaluated using the semi-quantitative scoring system. The 3 scoring methods were defined on the bases of the following: (1) independent cytoplasmic staining alone (Method C), (2) independent nucleic staining alone (Method N), and (3) mean of the sum of cytoplasmic score plus nucleic score (Method Mean of C plus N). Results: Of the 3 scoring mechanisms for p16INK4a expression, Method N and Method Mean of C plus N showed significant (p-values <0.05), but Method C showed non-significant (p = 0.245) frequency differences between ECAs and EMAs. In addition, Method Mean of C plus N had the highest overall accuracy rate (81.6%) for diagnostic distinction among these 3 scoring methods. Conclusion: According to the data characteristics and test effectiveness in this study, Method N and Method Mean of C plus N can significantly signal to distinguish between ECAs and EMAs; while Method C cannot do. Method Mean of C plus N is the most promising and favorable means among the three scoring mechanisms.

AB - Background: Endocervical adenocarcinomas (ECAs) and endometrial adenocarcinomas (EMAs) are malignancies that affect uterus; however, their biological behaviors are quite different. This distinction has clinical significance, because the appropriate therapy may depend on the site of tumor origin. The purpose of this study is to evaluate 3 different scoring mechanisms of p16INK4a immunohistochemical (IHC) staining in distinguishing between primary ECAs and EMAs. Methods: A tissue microarray (TMA) was constructed using formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue from hysterectomy specimens, including 14 ECAs and 24 EMAs. Tissue array sections were immunostained with a commercially available antibody of p16INK4a. Avidin-biotin complex (ABC) method was used for antigens visualization. The staining intensity and area extent of the IHC reactions was evaluated using the semi-quantitative scoring system. The 3 scoring methods were defined on the bases of the following: (1) independent cytoplasmic staining alone (Method C), (2) independent nucleic staining alone (Method N), and (3) mean of the sum of cytoplasmic score plus nucleic score (Method Mean of C plus N). Results: Of the 3 scoring mechanisms for p16INK4a expression, Method N and Method Mean of C plus N showed significant (p-values <0.05), but Method C showed non-significant (p = 0.245) frequency differences between ECAs and EMAs. In addition, Method Mean of C plus N had the highest overall accuracy rate (81.6%) for diagnostic distinction among these 3 scoring methods. Conclusion: According to the data characteristics and test effectiveness in this study, Method N and Method Mean of C plus N can significantly signal to distinguish between ECAs and EMAs; while Method C cannot do. Method Mean of C plus N is the most promising and favorable means among the three scoring mechanisms.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=65449133543&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=65449133543&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/1479-5876-7-25

DO - 10.1186/1479-5876-7-25

M3 - Article

C2 - 19366452

AN - SCOPUS:65449133543

VL - 7

JO - Journal of Translational Medicine

JF - Journal of Translational Medicine

SN - 1479-5876

M1 - 25

ER -