2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2009.07.018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Immunohistochemical expression of somatostatin receptors in digestive endocrine tumours

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

8
52
0
3

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
8
52
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Studies directly comparing pancreatic and gastrointestinal NET did not reveal significant differences in the expression of all five sstrs between the two groups [14,15], consistent with the findings of our study. Correlating the sstr1–5 immunoreactivity with tumor stages according to WHO classification, a trend to lower receptor immunostaining from WD to PD NET was observed for sstr1, sstr2a and sstr4, which is in agreement with previous results in NET [5,15,64,65] as well as in other tumor types [66,67]. The differences did not reach statistical significance possibly due to the small number of samples analyzed.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 82%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Studies directly comparing pancreatic and gastrointestinal NET did not reveal significant differences in the expression of all five sstrs between the two groups [14,15], consistent with the findings of our study. Correlating the sstr1–5 immunoreactivity with tumor stages according to WHO classification, a trend to lower receptor immunostaining from WD to PD NET was observed for sstr1, sstr2a and sstr4, which is in agreement with previous results in NET [5,15,64,65] as well as in other tumor types [66,67]. The differences did not reach statistical significance possibly due to the small number of samples analyzed.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 82%
“…In normal pancreatic islets and in neoplastic cells, sstr1, sstr2a and sstr5 immunoreactivity was observed both at the cell membrane and in the cytoplasm, whereas sstr3 and sstr4 were detected almost exclusively in the cytoplasm. This is only partially in agreement with other studies where plasma membrane localization was described for sstr2a only, with sstr1, sstr3, sstr4 and sstr5 showing mainly a cytoplasmic immunostaining pattern [15,38,57]. Possible explanations for the difference in cellular localization include the epitope selected and the antibodies used.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 56%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Employing a blind evaluation protocol performed by two pathologists, the immunoreactivity of SR2 and SR 5 were evaluated by semi-quantitative scoring system. The extent of staining was accepted as positive (more than 25% of stained cells), focally positive (less than 25% of stained cells, heterogeneously distributed), and negative (absence of staining) (Zamora et al, 2010) …”
Section: Histopathological Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%