The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

13 protocols using aperio at2 digital scanner

1

Histological Analysis of Colonic Inflammation and HIF-1α Expression

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Colons were collected from sacrificed mice at the end of each treatment schedule, as described above, fixed in 10% neutral-buffered formalin, and embedded in paraffin. Serial 5 µm microtome-cut sections were then stained with hematoxylin and eosin (Sigma-Aldrich). Slides were acquired with an Aperio AT2 digital scanner (Leica Biosystems) and analyzed with an Aperio Imagescope (Leica Biosystem). Scoring of colonic inflammation was determined as reported by Nagahama et al.44 (link) with minor modifications, by assessing mucosa thickening, inflammatory cells, and submucosa cell infiltration. Each criterion was scored as 0–4, and the sum of each score was defined as the histological score.
Immunohistochemical staining of HIF-1α was performed on colon sections of mice with the anti-HIF-1 alpha antibody (Abcam ab2185, 1:2000) and antigen unmasking in citrate buffer. Sections were incubated with specific Detection KIT-HRP (Abcam, ab236469) according to the manufacturer’s instructions, then counter-stained with hematoxylin to visualize nuclei, dehydrated and mounted in DPX (Sigma-Aldrich). Bright-field images were acquired with an Aperio AT2 digital scanner (Leica Biosystems) and analyzed with an Imagescope (Leica Biosystem) or using a Zeiss Axio Imager M2m microscope with a ×10 or ×20 objective.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Quantifying CCDC6 Protein Expression in Ovarian Cancer

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
A case series of 251 primary ovarian cancers was analysed on TMA. 6 TMAs were prepared with all the analysed samples [33 (link)]. Each tissue was examined for representability, and subsequently immunostained with anti-CCDC6 antibody (HPA 019,051, from Sigma-Aldrich), CCDC6 immunoreactivity of tumour cells was annotated. Visual annotation included staining intensity (negative, weak, moderate or strong), fraction of stained cells (% of total counted tumour cells), and subcellular localization. Following acquisition of anti-CCDC6 immunostained glass slides with a digital scanner, we also calculated the H-score on digital images by QuPath image analysis software [34 (link), 35 (link)]. Immunohistochemistry was performed as already described [30 (link)]. Median H-score was 64.2 (IQR 28.8; 97.2); Mean H-score was 67.5 (sd 47.1). The frequency distribution of digitally evaluated CCDC6 H-Score is summarised in Additional File 3: Table S2. A summary of study population is shown in Additional File 4: Table S3.
PDX FFPE sample slides were immunostained with anti-CCDC6 antibody (HPA 019051, from Sigma-Aldrich) and IHC signal was quantified on digital slides with Positive Cell Count function of QuPath software. CCDC6 protein expression was reported as optical density arbitrary units. All the glass slides were digited with Aperio AT2 digital scanner (Leica).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Quantifying vgr and bol Gene Expression in WCR

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The expression of vgr and bol gene was quantified from WCR eggs, neonates, 1st, 2nd, 3rd instar, pupae, and adults after feeding on diet incorporated with 50 ng μl−1 or different doses of vgr and bol fragment dsRNA. The designs of primers and probe regions are listed in Supplementary Table 6. Gene expression was analyzed using one-step real-time qRT-PCR. The assay was run, with 3 replicates per sample, using a single-plex set up with Bioline Sensifast Probe Lo Rox kit (Taunton, MA) and analyzed using the 2−ΔΔCt method based on the relative expression of the target gene and reference gene dvrps10. For in situ hybridization (ISH) analyses, target probes were designed by Advanced Cell Diagnostics (Hayward, CA) (listed in Supplementary Table 6). Insect samples were fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin (4% formaldehyde) for 48 to 72 h and processed as previously reported11 (link). Slide images were acquired using a Leica Aperio® AT2 digital scanner and captured at 40x magnification with a resolution of 0.25 µm pixel−1.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Immunohistochemical Analysis of Ki-67, MDM2, and p53

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Three 2.0 mm diameter core biopsies were selected from the paraffin-embedded tissue blocks. The cores were transferred to tissue microarray (TMA) and the pathologists were blinded to the identity of the TMA slides as previously described [19 (link)]. IHC tests with a rabbit monoclonal anti-Ki-67 antibody (1:1000, LEICA), an anti-MDM2 antibody (1:300, Abcam), and an anti-p53 (1:400, Abcam) antibody were performed using the Leica Bond-III system (Aperio, CA, USA). The expression of slides was examined by an Aperio AT2 digital scanner (Leica Biosystems). The H-score was obtained by multiplying the staining intensity by a constant to adjust the mean to the strongest intensity [H-score = 3 × (percentage of strong staining)] (1.0%, weak; 2.0%, moderate; 3.0%, strong) to give a score ranging from 0 to 300.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Immunohistochemistry Protocol for TMAs

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Before conducting immunohistochemistry (IHC), the TMA slides underwent staining with hematoxylin and eosin and were assessed for both quality and tumor content. The TMAs were then processed using the Leica BOND‐III, an automated, random, continuous‐access slide‐staining system located in Nussloch, Germany. This system allowed for the simultaneous execution of multiple IHC assays. To detect the primary antibody, the Bond Polymer Refine Detection system from Leica Biosystems was employed. The resulting immunostained slides were subsequently examined for expression using the Aperio AT2 digital scanner, also from Leica Biosystems. Staining intensity was categorized into four distinct levels: 0, negative; 1+, weak; 2+, moderate; and 3+, strong. The percentage of immunostaining was recorded and H‐scores were calculated as: Hscore=%cells1++2*%cells2++3*%cells3+
The maximum H‐score was 300, corresponding to 100% of cells stained with strong intensity.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Single-plex Chromogenic IHC for PD-L1

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Single-plex chromogenic IHC was performed using an automated staining system (Ventana BenchMark) with PD-L1 SP263 clone dispensed neat via a locked-in protocol, as recommended by the company (Ventana, CC1 pre-treatment for 64 min, Ventana Optiview detection protocol), a diaminobenzidine (DAB) reaction was used to detect antibody labelling with haematoxylin counterstaining. To assess specificity and sensitivity, an intra-run reproducibility section from a four core TMA was used in each test run, representing PD-L1 expression levels of <1%, 1–49%, and >50%, as well as a positive control (tonsil). All clinically assessed cases were scored by teams of two individuals who received training and are certified competent for PD-L1 scoring. All DAB IHC slides were scanned at 40x on an Aperio AT2 digital scanner (Leica Biosystems, Milton Keynes, UK). Images were automatically stored on a secure network server.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Histological Analysis of YAP and Ki67 in Kidney Sections

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For histological analysis mice were sacrificed at the indicated time, kidneys were collected, weighted and fixed in formalin 10% (BioOptica, #05-01005Q), included in paraffin and cut 5 μm/slides. Kidney sections were air-dried and rehydrated in PBS (Sigma-Aldrich, #P4417). For YAP staining kidney sections were incubated with YAP antibody and 5 min in Eosin G (BioOptica, #05-10002/L); For Ki67 staining kidney sections were incubated with Ki67 antibody and 2 min in Hematoxylin (BioOptica, #05-06015/L). Sections were then washed, processed through a dehydration alcohol scale and mounted in DPX (Sigma-Aldrich, #06522). For the semi-automated quantification, slides were acquired with Aperio AT2 digital scanner at magnification of 40 × (Leica Biosystems) and analyzed with Imagescope (Leica Biosystem). YAP and Ki67 nuclear staining per cyst was performed by Aperio Image analysis software (Leica Biosystems) and counted manually.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Quantitative Immunohistochemical Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Immunohistochemically stained slides were scanned using an Aperio AT2 digital scanner with a 40× objective (Leica Biosystems Inc., Buffalo Grove, IL). The images were analyzed using Visiopharm Digital Image Analysis (DIA) software (for Windows 7, version 6.9.1; Visiopharm, Hørsholm, Denmark). The cytoplasm was defined by outlining the nucleus with a system trained to digitally “paint” cell nuclei. The proportion of positively brown-stained cells was obtained using a predefined algorithm and optimized settings, as previously described [26 (link)]. The immunohistochemical score was expressed as the percentage of positive cells (possible range 0–100). The median values were used as cut-off values for discriminating between low and high expression of immunohistochemical staining. Cut-off values for CD68, CD163, VEGF-A, VEGF-C, and M2 ratio (CD163+/CD68+) were 8.70%, 10.12%, 7.42%, 3.09%, and 1.17 with high cytoplasmic staining, respectively.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Histological and Immunohistochemical Characterization of Tissue Sections

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded consecutive sections (4 µm) were dewaxed and dehydrated by a graded decrease alcohol series and stained for histology or immunohistochemical characterization (IHC). For histological analysis in bright-field microscopy, slides were stained using standard protocols for H&E (using Mayer’s H&E; BioOptica) and Sirius red staining (Direct Red 80, Sigma) for collagen fibers. For IHC, slides were immunostained for anti-GFP mAb (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and anti-RFP mAb (Rockland) according to the manufacturers’ instructions. Control experiments showed that on day 8 after infection, no tdTomato-expressing HSV-1TOM-OVA–infected cells were detectable in skin. After antigen unmasking with citrate buffer, pH 6.0, endogenous peroxidase activity was inhibited by incubating slides with 3% peroxidase water for 20 min at RT. Both mAbs were used at dilution of 1:200 and developed with EXPOSE rabbit-specific HRP/DAB detection IHC kit (ab80437). After immunostaining, DAB substrate chromogen was applied to sections for 5 min at RT and counterstained with Mayer’s Hematoxylin, dehydrated, and mounted with Eukitt (BioOptica). Proper external positive and negative controls were run simultaneously. Slides were acquired with Aperio AT2 digital scanner at magnification of 200× (Leica Biosystems). Cells in epidermis and papillary dermis were counted manually.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Immunohistochemical Analysis of Subcutaneous Tumors

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Formalin-fixed (HT501128, Sigma-Aldrich) paraffin-embedded sections of subcutaneous tumors were dewaxed and hydrated through a graded decrease alcohol series. For immunohistochemistry (IHC), slides were immunostained with the Automatic Leica BOND RX system (Leica Microsystems GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany). Antigen-retrieval was performed using sodium citrate buffer at 100 °C. Primary antibodies anti-Ki-67 (dilution 1/200; Ki-67 (D3B5) #12202, Cell Signaling Technology, Inc.) and anti-cleaved caspase-3 (1/400; Cleaved Caspase-3 (Asp175), #9661, Cell Signaling Technology, Inc.) were developed with Bond Polymer Refine Detection (Leica, DS9800). Bright-field images were acquired with an Aperio AT2 digital scanner (Leica Biosystems) and Aperio ImageScope software (v12.4.3.5008, Leica Biosystem).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!