The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Immunohistochemistry Is Highly Sensitive and Specific for the Detection of V600E BRAF Mutation in Melanoma
Abstract
This study investigated the sensitivity and specificity of immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis using an anti-BRAF antibody to detect the presence of the BRAF V600E mutation in patients with metastatic melanoma. A total of 100 patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IIIC unresectable or stage IV melanoma and who underwent tumor DNA BRAF mutation testing were selected. Paraffin-embedded, formalin-fixed melanoma biopsies were analyzed for the BRAF mutation status by independent, blinded observers using both conventional DNA molecular techniques and IHC with the novel BRAF V600E mutant-specific antibody, VE1. The antibody had a sensitivity of 97% (37/38) and a specificity of 98% (58/59) for detecting the presence of a BRAF V600E mutation. Of the BRAF-mutated cases, none of the non-V600E cases (including V600K) stained positive with the antibody (0/11). There were 5 cases with discordant BRAF mutation results. Additional molecular analysis confirmed the immunohistochemically obtained BRAF result in 3 cases, suggesting that the initial molecular testing results were incorrect. Two of these patients would not have received a BRAF inhibitor on the basis of the initial false-negative mutation testing result. Two cases remained discordant. The reported IHC method is an accurate, rapid, and cost-effective method for detecting V600E BRAF mutations in melanoma patients. Clinical use of the V600E BRAF antibody should be a valuable supplement to conventional mutation testing and allow V600E mutant metastatic melanoma patients to be triaged rapidly into appropriate treatment pathways.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mutations of the BRAF gene in human cancer
Davies, H., Bignell, G. R., Cox, C., Stephens, P., Edkins, S., Clegg, S., Teague, J., Woffendin, H., Garnett, M. J., Bottomley, W., et al. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature00766 · Cited by 10,674
Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation
Chapman, P. B., Hauschild, A., Robert, C., Haanen, J. B., Ascierto, P., Larkin, J., Dummer, R., Garbe, C., Testori, A., Maio, M., et al. (2011) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1103782 · Cited by 7,720
Cited by
Adolescent and young adult patients with cancer: a milieu of unique features
Sender, L., & Zabokrtsky, K. B. (2015) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2015.92 · Cited by 130
Hugdahl, E., Kalvenes, M. B., Puntervoll, H. E., Ladstein, R. G., & Akslen, L. A. (2016) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.2016.44 · Cited by 75
Betancourt, L. H., Szasz, A. M., Kuras, M., Rodriguez Murillo, J., Sugihara, Y., Pla, I., Horvath, Z., Pawłowski, K., Rezeli, M., Miharada, K., et al. (2019) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers11121981 · Cited by 24
Metadata
- Authors
- Long, G. V., Wilmott, J. S., Capper, D., Preusser, M., Zhang, Y. E., Thompson, J. F., Kefford, R. F., von Deimling, A., & Scolyer, R. A.
- Venue
- American Journal of Surgical Pathology
- Published
- 2013-01
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 61-65
- ISSN
- 0147-5185 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2107693762
- Cited by
- 298
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 16.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Immunohistochemistry Is Highly Sensitive and Specific for the Detection of V600E BRAF Mutation in Melanoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/pas.0b013e31826485c0
- The paper
- Long, G. V., Wilmott, J. S., Capper, D., Preusser, M., Zhang, Y. E., Thompson, J. F., Kefford, R. F., von Deimling, A., & Scolyer, R. A. (2013). Immunohistochemistry Is Highly Sensitive and Specific for the Detection of V600E BRAF Mutation in Melanoma. American Journal of Surgical Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1097/pas.0b013e31826485c0
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.