Advanced

Comparison of NCL-hTERT antibody reactivity and telomere repeat amplification protocol in situ in effusions

Zendehrokh, Nooreldin LU ; Rehnberg, Johanna and Dejmek, Annika LU (2007) In Acta Cytologica 51(6). p.886-892
Abstract
Objective To compare the performances of 2 methods, telomerase repeat amplification protocol (TRAP) in situ and antibodies to the hTERT protein, in assessing telomerase activity. Study Design TRAP in situ and immunomercial antibody (NCL-hTERT) was performed on 54 body cavity effusions. The results were compared and correlated to diagnosis. Results Thirty-four effitsions from patients with verified malignant disease contained cytologically malignant cells. Both methods were positive in 33 of the cases, whereas only hTERT was positive in I case. Twenty effusions, all containing mesothelial cells, came from patients with benign conditions. In 2 fluids atypical, hyperplastic mesothelial cells were both TRAP in situ and hTERT positive. All... (More)
Objective To compare the performances of 2 methods, telomerase repeat amplification protocol (TRAP) in situ and antibodies to the hTERT protein, in assessing telomerase activity. Study Design TRAP in situ and immunomercial antibody (NCL-hTERT) was performed on 54 body cavity effusions. The results were compared and correlated to diagnosis. Results Thirty-four effitsions from patients with verified malignant disease contained cytologically malignant cells. Both methods were positive in 33 of the cases, whereas only hTERT was positive in I case. Twenty effusions, all containing mesothelial cells, came from patients with benign conditions. In 2 fluids atypical, hyperplastic mesothelial cells were both TRAP in situ and hTERT positive. All remaining 18 fluids were TRAP in situ negative, whereas 12 of 18 were hTERT positive. Thus the results of TRAP in situ and hTERT immunohistochemistry disagreed in 1 of 34 (3%) malignant and 12 of 20 (60%) benign cases. Conclusion The sensitivities for malignancy were similar for TRAP in situ and hTERT immunobistochemistry. The specificity of the applied hTERT antibody was significantly lower, due to hTERT reactivity in mesothelial cells. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
nucleolin, mesothelial cells, malignancy, immunohistochemistry, effusion, hTERT, telomere repeat amplification protocol, telomerase
in
Acta Cytologica
volume
51
issue
6
pages
886 - 892
publisher
Science Printers and Publishers
external identifiers
  • wos:000251045800009
  • pmid:18077981
  • scopus:36348939182
ISSN
0001-5547
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
6c7487cf-7b83-4e42-8812-087bd8fd122c (old id 969345)
alternative location
http://www.acta-cytol.com/toc/auto_abstract.php?id=22852
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18077981?dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2008-01-30 16:00:20
date last changed
2017-01-01 06:42:16
@article{6c7487cf-7b83-4e42-8812-087bd8fd122c,
  abstract     = {Objective To compare the performances of 2 methods, telomerase repeat amplification protocol (TRAP) in situ and antibodies to the hTERT protein, in assessing telomerase activity. Study Design TRAP in situ and immunomercial antibody (NCL-hTERT) was performed on 54 body cavity effusions. The results were compared and correlated to diagnosis. Results Thirty-four effitsions from patients with verified malignant disease contained cytologically malignant cells. Both methods were positive in 33 of the cases, whereas only hTERT was positive in I case. Twenty effusions, all containing mesothelial cells, came from patients with benign conditions. In 2 fluids atypical, hyperplastic mesothelial cells were both TRAP in situ and hTERT positive. All remaining 18 fluids were TRAP in situ negative, whereas 12 of 18 were hTERT positive. Thus the results of TRAP in situ and hTERT immunohistochemistry disagreed in 1 of 34 (3%) malignant and 12 of 20 (60%) benign cases. Conclusion The sensitivities for malignancy were similar for TRAP in situ and hTERT immunobistochemistry. The specificity of the applied hTERT antibody was significantly lower, due to hTERT reactivity in mesothelial cells.},
  author       = {Zendehrokh, Nooreldin and Rehnberg, Johanna and Dejmek, Annika},
  issn         = {0001-5547},
  keyword      = {nucleolin,mesothelial cells,malignancy,immunohistochemistry,effusion,hTERT,telomere repeat amplification protocol,telomerase},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {6},
  pages        = {886--892},
  publisher    = {Science Printers and Publishers},
  series       = {Acta Cytologica},
  title        = {Comparison of NCL-hTERT antibody reactivity and telomere repeat amplification protocol in situ in effusions},
  volume       = {51},
  year         = {2007},
}