Limits...
Different approaches for interpretation and reporting of immunohistochemistry analysis results in the bone tissue - a review.

Fedchenko N, Reifenrath J - Diagn Pathol (2014)

Bottom Line: But the lack of standardization, especially on the post-analytical stage (interpreting and reporting of results), makes the comparison of the results of different studies impossible.Six major approaches to the interpretation and presentation of IHC analysis results were identified, analyzed and described.The overview of the existing approaches in evaluation and interpretation of IHC data, which are provided in the article, can be used in bone tissue research and for either better understanding of existing scoring systems or developing a new one.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Small Animal Clinic, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Bünteweg 9, 30559, Hannover, Germany. fedchenko.nick@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a well-established, widely accepted method in both clinical and experimental parts of medical science. It allows receiving valuable information about any process in any tissue, and especially in bone. Each year the amount of data, received by IHC, grows in geometric progression. But the lack of standardization, especially on the post-analytical stage (interpreting and reporting of results), makes the comparison of the results of different studies impossible.

Methods: Comprehensive PubMED literature search with a combination of search words "immunohistochemistry" and "scoring system" was performed and 773 articles describing IHC results were identified. After further manual analysis 120 articles were selected for detailed evaluation of used approaches.

Results: Six major approaches to the interpretation and presentation of IHC analysis results were identified, analyzed and described.

Conclusions: The overview of the existing approaches in evaluation and interpretation of IHC data, which are provided in the article, can be used in bone tissue research and for either better understanding of existing scoring systems or developing a new one. Standard multiparametric, semiquantitative IHC scoring systems should simplify and clarify the process of interpretation and reporting of received data.

Virtual slides: The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/13000_2014_221.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Count of articles, mentioning “VEGF” from 1994 to 2014 according to PubMed.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4260254&req=5

Fig1: Count of articles, mentioning “VEGF” from 1994 to 2014 according to PubMed.

Mentions: Inclusion criteria for comprehensive literature search were a description of IHC results with or without scoring system. The priority was given for the scoring systems for IHC markers that can be used in bone tissue studies. Among such markers were Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF), Bone Morphogenic Proteins (BMP), Osteocalcin (OCN), Osteopontin (OPN), and some others with developed scoring systems. Exemplary for VEGF and BMP the tendency in ongoing immunohistochemistry researches is shown in Figure 1 – their number is growing in geometric progression. During last 20 years (from January 1994 to July 2014) the number of articles mentioning VEGF was more than 50000. Bone Morphogenic Protein was mentioned in 9530 articles (Figure 2).Figure 1


Different approaches for interpretation and reporting of immunohistochemistry analysis results in the bone tissue - a review.

Fedchenko N, Reifenrath J - Diagn Pathol (2014)

Count of articles, mentioning “VEGF” from 1994 to 2014 according to PubMed.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4260254&req=5

Fig1: Count of articles, mentioning “VEGF” from 1994 to 2014 according to PubMed.
Mentions: Inclusion criteria for comprehensive literature search were a description of IHC results with or without scoring system. The priority was given for the scoring systems for IHC markers that can be used in bone tissue studies. Among such markers were Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF), Bone Morphogenic Proteins (BMP), Osteocalcin (OCN), Osteopontin (OPN), and some others with developed scoring systems. Exemplary for VEGF and BMP the tendency in ongoing immunohistochemistry researches is shown in Figure 1 – their number is growing in geometric progression. During last 20 years (from January 1994 to July 2014) the number of articles mentioning VEGF was more than 50000. Bone Morphogenic Protein was mentioned in 9530 articles (Figure 2).Figure 1

Bottom Line: But the lack of standardization, especially on the post-analytical stage (interpreting and reporting of results), makes the comparison of the results of different studies impossible.Six major approaches to the interpretation and presentation of IHC analysis results were identified, analyzed and described.The overview of the existing approaches in evaluation and interpretation of IHC data, which are provided in the article, can be used in bone tissue research and for either better understanding of existing scoring systems or developing a new one.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Small Animal Clinic, University of Veterinary Medicine, Foundation, Bünteweg 9, 30559, Hannover, Germany. fedchenko.nick@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a well-established, widely accepted method in both clinical and experimental parts of medical science. It allows receiving valuable information about any process in any tissue, and especially in bone. Each year the amount of data, received by IHC, grows in geometric progression. But the lack of standardization, especially on the post-analytical stage (interpreting and reporting of results), makes the comparison of the results of different studies impossible.

Methods: Comprehensive PubMED literature search with a combination of search words "immunohistochemistry" and "scoring system" was performed and 773 articles describing IHC results were identified. After further manual analysis 120 articles were selected for detailed evaluation of used approaches.

Results: Six major approaches to the interpretation and presentation of IHC analysis results were identified, analyzed and described.

Conclusions: The overview of the existing approaches in evaluation and interpretation of IHC data, which are provided in the article, can be used in bone tissue research and for either better understanding of existing scoring systems or developing a new one. Standard multiparametric, semiquantitative IHC scoring systems should simplify and clarify the process of interpretation and reporting of received data.

Virtual slides: The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/13000_2014_221.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus