Abstract
Abstract Although manual scoring is generally used to evaluate the presence of androgen receptor (AR) protein as detected by immunohistochemistry in tissue, manual evaluation is tedious, inefficient and subjective. Therefore, manual scoring is not feasible for the evaluation of large numbers of patients. In this study, a technician (CP) rated AR staining in tissue sections of 3 tissue microarrays (TMAs) constructed from 3 cores each of benign and malignant tissue from 134 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy between 1993 and 2006 at Roswell Park Cancer Institute. The manual scorer randomly sampled 50 nuclei from each core and scored each nuclei as not stained (score =0), or lightly (score = 1), moderately (score=2) or darkly (score = 3) stained. The average staining intensity was recorded per patient across the benign cores, and across the tumor cores. Automated staining used the Image Pro image processing program, in which the entire core was scanned, all nuclei segmented and average intensity values per between 0 (completely black) and 255 (completely white) were determined for each nucleus. The mean staining score for each core is calculated by taking the average of all the identified nuclei in the core, and an average intensity is calculated per patient across the benign cores, and across the malignant cores. The Pearson correlation between manual and automated scoring was 0.76. When stratified by benign or malignant tissue, the Pearson correlation between manual and automated scoring was 0.75 (benign) and 0.78 (malignant). Automated scoring of AR staining is comparable to manual scoring of AR in prostate tissue. In light of the greater efficiency of automated scoring, future evaluations of immunohistochemical staining may be usefully conducted using automated scoring of nuclei. Citation Format: Rochelle P. Ondracek, James L. Mohler, Catherine Pilarz, Sarah McEvoy, Karin Kasza, Carl Morrison, James Marshall. Comparison of manual and automated scoring of androgen receptor staining in prostate tissue. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 104th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2013 Apr 6-10; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2013;73(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 4852. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2013-4852
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
