Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To improve the quality and reproducibility of immunocytochemical staining of effusions by using a standardized method of cell processing. STUDY DESIGN: The study included the specimens of 108 effusions (44 benign, 56 adenocarcinoma metastases and 8 mesotheliomas). Hemorrhagic effusions were lysed using isotonic ammonium chloride. All pellets were fixed in 1% paraformaldehyde dissolved in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), pH 7.4, and washed in PBS. A Burker counting chamber was used to adjust the pellets to a standard cell concentration. The panel of monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) included MOC-31, Ber-EP4 and anticarcinoembryonic antigen (anti-CEA). The alkaline phosphatase/anti-alkaline phosphatase technique was applied. RESULTS: Standardized material processing resulted in reproducible specimens with good preservation of cell morphology, reduction of nonspecific interaction and good immunostain intensity. MAbs MOC-31 and Ber-EP4 gave similar results: both were positive in all adenocarcinomas. Anti-CEA was positive in 73%. Benign effusions showed no expression. In contrast to the literature, seven mesotheliomas showed variable membranous expression of MOC-31 and Ber-EP4. CONCLUSION: High-quality immunostaining results were obtained by using a standardized method of cell processing. MAbs MOC-31 and Ber-EP4 cannot be used as differentiation markers between mesotheliomas and adenocarcinomas. Discrepancies in immunocytochemical staining results may be caused partly by differences in cell preparation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kuenen‐Boumeester et al. (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: