| 1. |
- Alafuzoff, Irina, et al.
(författare)
-
Assessment of alpha-synuclein pathology : a study of the BrainNet Europe Consortium.
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0022-3069 .- 1554-6578. ; 67:2, s. 125-43
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To determine the reliability of assessment of alpha-synuclein-immunoreactive (alphaS-IR) structures by neuropathologists, 28 evaluators from 17 centers of BrainNet Europe examined current methods and reproducibility of alphaS-IR evaluation using a tissue microarray (TMA) technique. Tissue microarray blocks were constructed of samples from the participating centers that contained alphaS-IR structures. Slides from these blocks were stained in each center and assessed for neuronal perikaryal inclusions, neurites, and glial cytoplasmic inclusions. The study was performed in 2 phases. First, the TMA slides were stained with the antibody of the center's choice. In this phase, 59% of the sections were of good or acceptable quality, and 4 of 9 antibodies used performed consistently. Differences in interpretation and categorization of alphaS-IR structures, however, led to differing results between the laboratories. Prior to the second phase, the neuropathologists participated in a training session on the evaluation of alphaS-IR structures. Based on the results of the first phase, selected antibodies using designated antigen retrieval methods were then applied to TMA slides in the second phase. When the designated methods of both staining and evaluation were applied, all 26 subsequently stained TMA sections evaluated were of good/acceptable quality, and a high level of concordance in the assessment of the presence or absence of specific alphaS-IR structures was achieved. A semiquantitative assessment of alphaS-IR neuronal perikaryal inclusions yielded agreements ranging from 49% to 82%, with best concordance in cortical core samples. These results suggest that rigorous methodology and dichotomized assessment (i.e. determining the presence or absence of alphaS-IR) should be applied, and that semiquantitative assessment can be recommended only for the cortical samples. Moreover, the study demonstrates that there are limitations in the scoring of alphaS-IR structures.
|
|
| 2. |
- Alafuzoff, Irina, et al.
(författare)
-
Inter-laboratory comparison of neuropathological assessments of beta-amyloid protein : a study of the BrainNet Europe consortium.
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Acta Neuropathologica. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0001-6322 .- 1432-0533. ; 115:5, s. 533-46
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Amyloid-beta-protein (Abeta) is generally assessed by neuropathologists in diagnostics. This BrainNet Europe ( http://www.brainnet-europe.org/ ) (15 centres and 26 participants) study was carried out to investigate the reliability of such an assessment. In the first part of this trial, tissue microarray sections were stained with the antibody of each centre's choice. Reflecting the reality, seven antibodies and a plethora of pretreatment strategies were used. Ninety-two percent of the stainings were of good/acceptable quality and the estimation of presence of Abeta aggregates yielded good results. However, a poor agreement was reached particularly regarding quantitative (density) and qualitative (diffuse/cored plaques) results. During a joint meeting, the clone 4G8 was determined to label best the fleecy/diffuse plaques, and thus, this clone and the formic acid pretreatment technique were selected for the second part of this study. Subsequently, all stained sections were of good/acceptable quality and again a high level of concordance of the dichotomized (presence/absence) assessment of plaques and CAA was achieved. However, even when only one antibody was used, the type of Abeta-aggregates (diffuse/cored), type of vessel and Vonsattel grade, were not reliably assigned. Furthermore, the quantification of lesions was far from reliable. In line with the first trial, the agreement while assessing density (some, moderate and many) was unimpressive. In conclusion, we can confirm the utility of immunohistochemical detection of Abeta-protein in diagnostics and research. It is noteworthy that to reach reproducible results a dichotomized assessment of Abeta-immunoreactivity rather than quantification and assignment of various types of lesions should be applied, particularly when comparing results obtained by different neuropathologists.
|
|
