English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Aims  To compare fluorescence  in situ  hybridization (FISH), immunohistochemistry (IHC) and quantitative real-time reverse transcription-PCR (qRT-PCR) assays for detection of  ROS1  fusion in a large number of  ROS1 -positive lung adenocatcinoma (ADC) patients.    Methods  Using IHC analysis, sixty lung ADCs including 16 cases with ROS1 protein expression and 44 cases without ROS1 expression were selected for this study. The  ROS1  fusion status was examined by FISH and qRT-PCR assay.    Results  Among 60 cases, 16 (26.7%), 13 (21.7%) and 20 (33.3%) cases were  ROS1  positive revealed by IHC, FISH and qRT-PCR, respectively. Using FISH as a standard method for  ROS1  fusion detection, the sensitivity and specificity of IHC were 100% and 93.6%, respectively. Three IHC-positive cases, which showed FISH negative, were demonstrated with  ROS1  fusion by qRT-PCR analysis. The sensitivity and specificity of qRT-PCR for detection for  ROS1  fusion were 100% and 85.1%, respectively. The total concordance rate between IHC and qRT-PCR were 93.3%.    Conclusion  IHC is a reliable and rapid screening tool in routine pathologic laboratories for the identification of suitable candidates for ROS1-targeted therapy. Some ROS1 IHC-positive but FISH-negative cases did harbor the translocation events and may benefit from crizotinib.

Detection of ROS1 Gene Rearrangement in Lung Adenocarcinoma: Comparison of IHC, FISH and Real-Time RT-PCR