The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

11 protocols using a16 4

1

Immunohistochemical Detection of MMR Proteins

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Followed the same principle as presented for the CDX2 immunostaining. Staining was performed using monoclonal mouse antibodies: MLH1 (Novocastra, Leica, (Wetzlar) Germany, clone ES05, dilution 1:100, product code NCL-L-MLH1); MSH2 (Novocastra, Leica, clone 25D12, dilution 1:100, product code NCL-L-MSH2); MSH6 (BD Transduction Laboratories, clone 44/MSH6, dilution 1:200, material number 610919); and PMS2 (BD Pharmingen, clone A16–4, dilution 1:500, material number 556415).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Immunohistochemistry Assays for Tumor Profiling

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The following immunohistochemistry assays were performed in routine practice: hormone receptors (estrogen (ER) and progesterone (PR)), TP53, and MSH6 and PMS2 to estimate the mismatch repair status. Immunohistochemistry was performed on a Leica Bond-III Autostainer using the Bond Polymer Refine Detection Kit (Leica Biosystem), according to the manufacturer’s instruction. The following primary antibodies were applied on 5μm FFPE tissue slides after appropriate heat-induced epitope retrieval (ER1 or ER2, Leica Biosystems): TP53 (DO-7; DAKO; 1:800 dilution), PMS2 (A16-4; Pharmingen; 1:300 dilution), MSH6 (44; LSBio; 1:50 dilution), ER (1D5; DAKO; 1:50 dilution), and PR (PgR636; DAKO; 1:300 dilution). Staining was categorized using a standard pathological system, with the staining intensity (+ to +++) and the percentage of tumor stained cells (0 to 100%). Hormone receptors staining were considered positive if >+ and >10%, TP53 staining was considered abnormal if >+ and >10%, or in case of staining loss with positive endogenous control [22 (link)]. Mismatch repair deficiency was defined by the loss of staining of either PMS2 or MSH6 [23 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Evaluating EBV and MMR Status in Tumor Samples

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Positivity of EBV were examined by the EBV‐encoded small RNA‐in situ hybridization (EBER‐ISH) method, using BOND Ready‐to‐Use ISH EBER probe (PB0589; Leica, Newcastle, UK) and ISH with the automated BOND system (BOND‐MAX and BOND‐III systems; Leica) following the manufacturer's instructions. Expression of mismatch repair (MMR) genes including MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 was examined by IHC, in which the following Abs were used: MLH1 (ES05) (NCL‐L‐MLH1; Leica), MSH2 (G219‐1129) (556349; BD Biosciences, NJ, USA), MSH6 (EPR3945) (GTX62383; GeneTex, CA, USA) and PMS2 (A16‐4) (556415; BD). Tumor cells in the absence of at least 1 MMR protein were determined as MMR‐deficient. Normal epithelial cells and lymphocytes were used as an internal control for the evaluation.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Immunohistochemical Detection of MMR Proteins

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
MMR proteins were probed by IHC with antibodies raised against MLH1 (G168–15, BD Biosciences), MSH2 (FE11, Calbiochem, Merck), MSH6 (44, BD Biosciences), and PMS2 (A16–4, BD Biosciences). Pathologist reviewed the IHC slides, providing the presence or not of positive tumor cells showing MMR expression.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Comprehensive Immunohistochemical Evaluation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed on FFPE sections (4 μm in thickness) for CD3 (Dako, A0452, 1/200), CD4 (Dako 4B12 IR649, 1/100), CD8 (Dako C8/144B, IS623, undiluted), PD-L1 (Dako clone 22C3), MLH1 (Dako ES05 1/50), MSH2 (Dako FE11 1/50), MSH6 (Dako EP49 1/50), PMS2 (BD Phamingen A16-4 1/50). PD-L1 immunostaining with Dako clone 22C3 was performed by Merck Research Laboratory, Palo Alto, CA. IC (lymphocytic) infiltrates were scored according to the method of Rothermel et al.29 (link)modified to include both (1) percentage of tumor area occupied by tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) and (2) percentage of circumferential peri-tumoral (PT) area occupied by IC infiltrates. Scoring was as follows: “0”: absence of IC; “1”: rare, <5% of the tumor area or the PT area positive; “2”: 5 to 50% of the tumor area or PT area positive; and “3”: 50–100% of tumor area or PT areas positive. PD-L1 expression in a characteristic membranous pattern was recorded as (1) percentage of tumor area (tumor cells) positive and (2) percentage of IC area positive in the circumferential PT areas. The immunohistochemical staining was assessed and quantified independently by two anatomic pathologists (R.L.B. and S.G.). Any discordant results were reviewed microscopically and consensus reached.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Immunohistochemical Analysis of MMR Proteins

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Expression of MMR proteins was assessed in 16 WCM UTUC tumors and 14 matched archival WCM UCB. IHC was performed on 4-μm-thick formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue sections using a Leica Bond III automated stainer. Mouse antibodies against MLH1 (G168-728, 1:25 dilution, BD Biosciences), PMS2 (A16-4, 1:100 dilution, BD Biosciences), MSH2 (FE11, 1:200, EMD Millipore), and MSH6 (44/MSH6, 1:200, BD Biosciences) were used. IHC slides were scanned at ×200 total magnification using a single z-plane via an Aperio AT2 whole slide scanner (Leica Biosystems, San Diego, CA, USA). The scanned images were loaded onto the HALOTM imaging analysis platform (Indica Labs, Corrales, New Mexico, USA). Study pathologists manually selected tumor areas for automated image scoring, and the HALOTM analysis software determined the staining intensity of each tumor cell (0, 1+, 2+, 3+) and percentage of tumor cells for each intensity level. H-scores were then calculated using the formula [1×(% of cells with intensity of 1+)+2×(% cells 2+)+3×(% cells 3+)] with possible scores thus ranging from 0 to 300.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Western Blot Analysis of DNA Repair Proteins

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
SDS-PAGE was performed using 4–12% Criterion XT Bis-Tris gels (Bio-rad). Proteins were transferred onto Protran 0.45 µM nitrocellulose membranes (GE Healthcare). Membranes were blocked for 1 h using blocking reagent (Rockland) diluted with PBS-0.1% Tween. Then, membranes were incubated overnight at 4°C with primary antibodies, diluted in Rockland-PBS-Tween. Membranes were washed using PBS-Tween (0.1%) and incubated with secondary anti-mouse and anti-rabbit HRP (ThermoFisher Scientific), depending on primary antibody isotype, diluted 1:50 000 in Rockland-PBS-Tween for 1 h at room temperature. Bands were visualized using Amersham ECL select western blotting detection reagent (GE Healthcare). Antibodies used: Anti-Msh2: mouse mAb (FE11, Calbiochem), anti-Msh6 (Abcam, clone 44), anti-Mlh1: rabbit polyclonal (C-20, Santa Cruz Biotechnology), anti-Pms2: mouse Ab (A16-4, BD Pharmingen), anti-Kap-1p (Bethyl, polyclonal A300-767A), anti-Chk1p (clone 133D3, Cell Signaling Technology) and anti-PCNA (clone PC10 clone, Santa Cruz).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Immunohistochemical Staining for MMR Proteins

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The protocol for IHC has been reported previously.6 Briefly, deparaffinized 4‐mm‐thick sections from each paraffin block were exposed to 0.3% hydrogen peroxide for 15 min to block endogenous peroxidase activity. Antigen retrieval was performed by autoclaving in a 10‐mM citrate buffer (pH 6.0) for 10 min. Anti‐MLH1 (G168–728; 1:200 dilution; BD Biosciences, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA), anti‐MSH2 (FE11; 1:100 dilution; Biocare Medical, Concord, CA, USA), anti‐PMS2 (A16‐4; 1:200 dilution; BD Biosciences) and anti‐MSH6 antibodies (SP93;1:200 dilution; Spring Bioscience, Pleasanton, CA, USA) were used as the primary antibodies. We used an automated stainer (Dako, Tokyo, Japan) according to the vendor's protocol for staining. ChemMate EnVision (Dako, Tokyo, Japan) methods were used for detection. The IHC results were evaluated by two pathologists independently and the results coincided completely.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Immunohistochemical Analysis of p53 and MMR

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Immunohistochemistry analysis was performed using a tissue microarray to evaluate the expression of tumor protein p53 (p53) and two MMR proteins (hMSH6 and PMS2). Staining for p53 was performed using a primary monoclonal antibody (pre-diluted DO-7; Dako, Santa Clara, CA, USA) as previously described [8 (link)]. Expression of p53 was considered aberrant if >75% of the cells were strongly positive for p53 (overexpression) or if 0% of the cells were positive (null phenotype). Staining for the MMR proteins was performed using primary monoclonal antibodies against MSH6 (GRBP.P1/2/D4, 1:200; Serotec Inc., Raleigh, NC, USA) and PMS2 (A16-4, 1:200; PharMingen, San Diego, CA, USA). Expression was defined as abnormal if the expression of at least one of the MMR proteins was completely absent from all tumor cell nuclei [16 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Evaluating p53 and MMR Protein Expression in Tumor Samples

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Tumor areas were marked in the tissue sections from each patient. To minimize the effects of protein expression heterogeneity, paired 2-mm core tumor samples were extracted from each donor block and arranged in a new tissue microarray (TMA) block using a trephine apparatus (SuperBioChips Laboratories, Seoul, Korea).
Immunohistochemistry was performed using the TMA to evaluate p53 and MMR protein expressions (hMLH1, hMSH2, hMSH6, and PMS2). Staining for p53 was performed using a primary monoclonal antibody (pre-diluted DO-7; Dako, Santa Clara, CA, USA) as previously described [25 (link)], and expression was considered aberrant if >75% of the cells were strongly positive for p53 (overexpressed) or 0% of the cells were positive (the null phenotype). Staining for the MMR proteins was performed using primary monoclonal antibodies against MLH1 (G168-728, 1:250; PharMingen, San Diego, CA, USA), MSH2 (FE11, 1:50; Oncogene Research Products, Cambridge, MA, USA), MSH6 (GRBP.P1/2.D4, 1:200; Serotec Inc, Raleigh, NC, USA), and PMS2 (A16-4, 1:200; PharMingen). Expression was defined as abnormal based on the complete absence of one or more of the MMR proteins from all tumor cell nuclei [26 (link)].
+ 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!