nCounter NanoString Assay Shows Variable Concordance With Immunohistochemistry-based Algorithms in Classifying Cases of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma According to the Cell-of-Origin
Published in
Applied Immunohistochemistry & Molecular Morphology, October 2019
Classifying diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) according to the cell-of-origin (COO) was first proposed using gene expression profiling; accordingly, DLBCL is classified into germinal-center B-cell type and activated B-cell type. Immunohistochemistry (IHC)-based classification using different algorithms is used widely due to the ability to use formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue. Recently, newer techniques using RNA expression from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded were introduced including the nCounter NanoString platform assay. In this brief report, we study the degree of concordance between the NanoString assay and 6 commonly utilized IHC-based algorithms to classify DLBCL cases by COO. Stains for CD10, BCL2, BCL6, FOXP-1, MUM-1, and LOM2 were used to classify a cohort of DLBCL by COO according to the respective IHC-algorithms. Then, RNA was extracted from the same cases for NanoString assay classification. The degree of concordance was calculated between the NanoString classification and each IHC-algorithm as well as among the different IHC-algorithm themselves. The concordance in COO classification of DLBCL between NanonoString assay and IHC-based algorithms is variable depending on the used IHC-algorithm; the highest concordance is seen with the Visco algorithm (κ=0.69; P=0.001). Therefore, discrepancies between the recently introduced NanoString assay and the commonly utilized IHC-algorithms are expected to some extent and should be taken into consideration when interpreting conflicting results.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 September 2018.
All research outputs
#16,053,755
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Applied Immunohistochemistry & Molecular Morphology
#559
of 1,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,284
of 362,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Immunohistochemistry & Molecular Morphology
#14
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,153 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 362,793 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
