Assessment the of Amplification HER-2/neu Gene by Chromogenic In Situ Hybridization (CISH) Compared to Immunohistochemistry (IHC) Method in Gastric Cancer

S. Amoueian, A. Attaranzadeh, Mahdi Montazer, Arash Akhavan Rezayat, Amir Behforouz, Fatemeh Sobhani
{"title":"Assessment the of Amplification HER-2/neu Gene by Chromogenic In Situ Hybridization (CISH) Compared to Immunohistochemistry (IHC) Method in Gastric Cancer","authors":"S. Amoueian, A. Attaranzadeh, Mahdi Montazer, Arash Akhavan Rezayat, Amir Behforouz, Fatemeh Sobhani","doi":"10.5812/RIJM.13397","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Gastric cancer has a high mortality rate and often has a poor treatment outcome. The HER2/neu gene target therapy has been known as a potential way for treatment. Objectives: The goal of our study was assessment the relation between chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) methods in determining the best diagnostic method for gastric cancer. Methods: In this historical cohort study, 50 gastric cancer samples were analyzed by CISH and IHC. The relation between clinical-pathological parameters of HER2/neu was also analyzed. Alive patients were followed from 2009 through 2012 for the main out-comes (mortality). The results of these two methods, in terms of sex, age, tumor size, grading, staging, tumor location, metaplasia, presence of necrosis and ulceration, vascular invasion, the TNM system, mucin or signet producing adenocarcinoma cells and patient survival rates were compared. Results: There was no significant difference between IHC and CISH regarding the sex, age, tumor size, grading, staging, tumor location, metaplasia, presence of necrosis and ulceration, vascular invasion, the TNM system, mucin or signet producing adenocarci-nomacellsandpatientsurvivalrates. Comparisonof TNMscoresbythesetwomethodsshowednosignificantrelationshipbetween IHC and staging, but a statistically significant difference between CISH and different N staging, (P < 0.05) was assessed. Conclusions: Comparison between IHC and CISH showed the only significant relationship between CISH and different N staging. Therefore, low amplified CISH was a better diagnostic method for gastric cancer, compared to low expression in IHC.","PeriodicalId":20994,"journal":{"name":"Razavi International Journal of Medicine","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Razavi International Journal of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/RIJM.13397","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Gastric cancer has a high mortality rate and often has a poor treatment outcome. The HER2/neu gene target therapy has been known as a potential way for treatment. Objectives: The goal of our study was assessment the relation between chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) methods in determining the best diagnostic method for gastric cancer. Methods: In this historical cohort study, 50 gastric cancer samples were analyzed by CISH and IHC. The relation between clinical-pathological parameters of HER2/neu was also analyzed. Alive patients were followed from 2009 through 2012 for the main out-comes (mortality). The results of these two methods, in terms of sex, age, tumor size, grading, staging, tumor location, metaplasia, presence of necrosis and ulceration, vascular invasion, the TNM system, mucin or signet producing adenocarcinoma cells and patient survival rates were compared. Results: There was no significant difference between IHC and CISH regarding the sex, age, tumor size, grading, staging, tumor location, metaplasia, presence of necrosis and ulceration, vascular invasion, the TNM system, mucin or signet producing adenocarci-nomacellsandpatientsurvivalrates. Comparisonof TNMscoresbythesetwomethodsshowednosignificantrelationshipbetween IHC and staging, but a statistically significant difference between CISH and different N staging, (P < 0.05) was assessed. Conclusions: Comparison between IHC and CISH showed the only significant relationship between CISH and different N staging. Therefore, low amplified CISH was a better diagnostic method for gastric cancer, compared to low expression in IHC.
显色原位杂交(CISH)与免疫组化(IHC)方法扩增癌症HER-2/neu基因的比较
背景:癌症死亡率高,治疗效果差。HER2/neu基因靶向治疗已被认为是一种潜在的治疗方法。目的:本研究旨在评估显色原位杂交(CISH)和免疫组织化学(IHC)方法之间的关系,以确定癌症的最佳诊断方法。方法:在这项历史性队列研究中,用CISH和IHC对50例癌症样本进行分析。并分析HER2/neu的临床病理参数之间的关系。从2009年到2012年,对存活患者的主要转归(死亡率)进行了随访。比较这两种方法在性别、年龄、肿瘤大小、分级、分期、肿瘤位置、化生、坏死和溃疡的存在、血管侵袭、TNM系统、产生粘蛋白或印戒的腺癌细胞和患者生存率方面的结果。结果:IHC和CISH在性别、年龄、肿瘤大小、分级、分期、肿瘤位置、化生、坏死和溃疡、血管侵袭、TNM系统、产生粘蛋白或印戒的腺癌细胞和患者生存率方面没有显著差异。两种方法对TNMs评分的比较表明,IHC和分期之间没有明显的相关性,但评估了CISH和不同N分期之间的统计学显著差异(P<0.05)。结论:IHC和CISH之间的比较表明,CISH与不同的N分期之间只有显著的关系。因此,与IHC中的低表达相比,低扩增CISH是癌症更好的诊断方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: The Razavi International Journal of Medicine aims at publishing the high quality materials, both clinical and scientific, on all aspects of Medicine and medical sciences. The Razavi International Journal of Medicine is an international, English language, peer-reviewed, open access, free access journal dealing with general Medicine and medical sciences, clinical and basic studies, public health, Disaster Medicine and Health Policy. It is an official Journal of the education and research department, Razavi Hospital and is published quarterly.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信