Immunohistochemical staining: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Jensflorian (talk | contribs) →Interpretation: base error rate |
Jensflorian (talk | contribs) →Interpretation: typo |
||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
#*A combination of the above. | #*A combination of the above. | ||
Generally, interpretations can be subjective, and this is especially true when the staining is weak and focal. In other words, "... your weak [positive] stain might be somebody else’s negative."<ref>URL: [http://bitesizebio.com/articles/immunohistochemistry-getting-the-stain-you-want/ http://bitesizebio.com/articles/immunohistochemistry-getting-the-stain-you-want/]. Accessed on: 1 September 2012.</ref> This is often reflected in publications | Generally, interpretations can be subjective, and this is especially true when the staining is weak and focal. In other words, "... your weak [positive] stain might be somebody else’s negative."<ref>URL: [http://bitesizebio.com/articles/immunohistochemistry-getting-the-stain-you-want/ http://bitesizebio.com/articles/immunohistochemistry-getting-the-stain-you-want/]. Accessed on: 1 September 2012.</ref> This is often reflected in publications reporting contradictory results regarding the rates of positivity for stains in different tumours, even if the methods uses are identical. | ||
The cynical might say it is unwritten rule that: "... if the stain is weak and focal it can be anything you want to make it -- positive or negative -- so it fits perfectly with your diagnosis!" | The cynical might say it is unwritten rule that: "... if the stain is weak and focal it can be anything you want to make it -- positive or negative -- so it fits perfectly with your diagnosis!" | ||