↓ Skip to main content

Positive nuclear BAP1 immunostaining helps differentiate non-small cell lung carcinomas from malignant mesothelioma

Overview of attention for article published in Oncotarget, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#11 of 14,327)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
58 news outlets
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Positive nuclear BAP1 immunostaining helps differentiate non-small cell lung carcinomas from malignant mesothelioma
Published in
Oncotarget, July 2016
DOI 10.18632/oncotarget.10653
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michele Carbone, David Shimizu, Andrea Napolitano, Mika Tanji, Harvey I. Pass, Haining Yang, Sandra Pastorino

Abstract

The differential diagnosis between pleural malignant mesothelioma (MM) and lung cancer is often challenging. Immunohistochemical (IHC) stains used to distinguish these malignancies include markers that are most often positive in MM and less frequently positive in carcinomas, and vice versa. However, in about 10-20% of the cases, the IHC results can be confusing and inconclusive, and novel markers are sought to increase the diagnostic accuracy. We stained 45 non-small cell lung cancer samples (32 adenocarcinomas and 13 squamous cell carcinomas) with a monoclonal antibody for BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) and also with an IHC panel we routinely use to help differentiate MM from carcinomas, which include, calretinin, Wilms Tumor 1, cytokeratin 5, podoplanin D2-40, pankeratin CAM5.2, thyroid transcription factor 1, Napsin-A, and p63. Nuclear BAP1 expression was also analyzed in 35 MM biopsies. All 45 non-small cell lung cancer biopsies stained positive for nuclear BAP1, whereas 22/35 (63%) MM biopsies lacked nuclear BAP1 staining, consistent with previous data. Lack of BAP1 nuclear staining was associated with MM (two-tailed Fisher's Exact Test, P = 5.4 x 10-11). Focal BAP1 staining was observed in a subset of samples, suggesting polyclonality. Diagnostic accuracy of other classical IHC markers was in agreement with previous studies. Our study indicated that absence of nuclear BAP1 stain helps differentiate MM from lung carcinomas. We suggest that BAP1 staining should be added to the IHC panel that is currently used to distinguish these malignancies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Postgraduate 4 15%
Other 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 8 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 37%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 11 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 458. 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 November 2021.
All research outputs
#48,856
of 22,881,964 outputs
Outputs from Oncotarget
#11
of 14,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,234
of 363,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oncotarget
#2
of 1,346 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,964 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,327 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 363,152 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,346 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.