Tissue Microarray Construction and Analysis

The construction and analysis of TMAs were realized following the guidelines of next-generation tissue microarray construction (see Figure S4) [38 (link)]. All tissues were taken from the archive of the Institute of Pathology (University Hospital of Erlangen). All slides were scanned using a slide scanner (3DHISTECH PANNORAMIC 250 Flash II, 3DHISTECH Ltd., Budapest, Hungary). All TMAs were digitally analyzed using CaseViewer (Ver. 2.4., 3DHISTECH Ltd., Budapest, Hungary), and tumor buds were marked and numbered using the annotation tool of the program. The punch diameter was 0.6 mm (representing an area of 0.283 mm²). With at least two or three evaluable cores which met study criteria, the total area was similarly representative of the 0.785 mm² at 20× (field of view: 25) proposed by the ITBCC [4 (link)]. These punches were performed with the intention of analyzing all samples using a double-blinded approach while avoiding checking whole slides for hot spots or ROIs.

Free full text: Click here

Pour Farid P., Eckstein M., Merkel S., Grützmann R., Hartmann A., Bruns V., Benz M., Schneider-Stock R, & Geppert C.I. (2021). Novel Criteria for Intratumoral Budding with Prognostic Relevance for Colon Cancer and Its Histological Subtypes. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 22(23), 13108.

Publication 2021

PANNORAMIC 250 Flash II CaseViewer

Microarray Spots Tissues Tumor

Corresponding Organization : Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen

Other organizations : Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated Circuits

Top 5 similar protocols

Variable analysis

independent variables

Construction and analysis of TMAs

dependent variables

Tumor buds marked and numbered

control variables

Punch diameter was 0.6 mm (representing an area of 0.283 mm^2)
At least two or three evaluable cores which met study criteria, the total area was similarly representative of the 0.785 mm^2 at 20× (field of view: 25) proposed by the ITBCC
Samples were analyzed using a double-blinded approach while avoiding checking whole slides for hot spots or ROIs

controls

Positive controls not explicitly mentioned
Negative controls not explicitly mentioned

Annotations

Based on most similar protocols

Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.

As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.

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?

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!