↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression in primary colorectal carcinomas and their related metastases on tissue sections and tissue microarray

Overview of attention for article published in Virchows Archiv, July 2006
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Assessment of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression in primary colorectal carcinomas and their related metastases on tissue sections and tissue microarray
Published in
Virchows Archiv, July 2006
DOI 10.1007/s00428-006-0247-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Frédéric Bibeau, Florence Boissière-Michot, Jean-Christophe Sabourin, Sophie Gourgou-Bourgade, Michèle Radal, Frédérique Penault-Llorca, Philippe Rochaix, Laurent Arnould, Marie-Pierre Bralet, David Azria, Marc Ychou

Abstract

Metastatic colorectal carcinomas (CRC) resistant to chemotherapy may benefit from targeting monoclonal therapy cetuximab when they express the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Because of its clinical implications, we studied EGFR expression by immunohistochemistry on tissue sections of primary CRC (n=32) and their related metastases (n=53). A tissue microarray (TMA) was generated from the same paraffin blocks to determine whether this technique could be used for EGFR screening in CRC. On tissue sections, 84% of the primary CRC and 94% of the metastases were EGFR-positive. When matched, they showed a concordant EGFR-positive status in 78% of the cases. Moreover, staining intensity and extent of EGFR-positive cells in the primary CRC correlated with those observed in the synchronous metastases. On TMA, 65% of the primary CRC, 66% of the metastases, and 43% of the matched primary CRC metastases were EGFR-positive. There was no concordant EGFR status between the primary and the metastatic sites. A strong discrepancy of EGFR status was noted between TMA and tissue sections. In conclusion, EGFR expression measured in tissue sections from primary CRC and their related metastases was found to be similar and frequent, but it was significantly underestimated by the TMA technique.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 5 17%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Researcher 4 13%
Other 2 7%
Other 7 23%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 50%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 13%
Engineering 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 4 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 June 2010.
All research outputs
#7,453,126
of 22,785,242 outputs
Outputs from Virchows Archiv
#410
of 1,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,703
of 65,368 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virchows Archiv
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,785,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,950 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 65,368 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.