Antibody Validation

Author(s):  
Gordana Wozniak-Knopp
Keyword(s):  
2014 ◽  
Vol 138 (12) ◽  
pp. 1564-1577 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fan Lin ◽  
Zongming Chen

Context Immunohistochemistry has become an indispensable ancillary technique in anatomic pathology laboratories. Standardization of every step in preanalytic, analytic, and postanalytic phases is crucial to achieve reproducible and reliable immunohistochemistry test results. Objective To standardize immunohistochemistry tests from preanalytic, analytic, to postanalytic phases. Data Sources Literature review and Geisinger (Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania) experience. Conclusions This review article delineates some critical points in preanalytic, analytic, and postanalytic phases; reiterates some important questions, which may or may not have a consensus at this time; and updates the newly proposed guidelines on antibody validation from the College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center. Additionally, the article intends to share Geisinger's experience with (1) testing/optimizing a new antibody and troubleshooting; (2) interpreting and reporting immunohistochemistry assay results; (3) improving and implementing a total immunohistochemistry quality management program; and (4) developing best practices in immunohistochemistry.


2018 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 117739011875746 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael G Weller

The quality of research antibodies is an issue for decades. Although several papers have been published to improve the situation, their impact seems to be limited. This publication makes the effort to simplify the description of validation criteria in a way that the occasional antibody user is able to assess the validation level of an immunochemical reagent. A simple, 1-page checklist is supplied for the practical application of these criteria.


2014 ◽  
Vol 387 (11) ◽  
pp. 1129-1129
Author(s):  
Hana Cernecka ◽  
Wisuit Pradidarcheep ◽  
Wouter H. Lamers ◽  
Martina Schmidt ◽  
Martin C. Michel

Lab on a Chip ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 2190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela R. Wu ◽  
Tiara L.A. Kawahara ◽  
Nicole A. Rapicavoli ◽  
Jan van Riggelen ◽  
Emelyn H. Shroff ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 36 (21) ◽  
pp. 1, 10, 12-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
DeeAnn Visk
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 317 (5) ◽  
pp. H954-H957 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Waas ◽  
Rebekah L. Gundry

Human pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (hPSC-CMs) can be exploited as models for a wide range of research applications and numerous protocols for generating hPSC-CMs have been described. However, it is currently not possible to direct differentiation to a single, homogeneous end point, and the resulting heterogeneity may be variable among laboratories, cell lines, and protocols. Consequently, the ability to assess phenotypic heterogeneity of the cell population is critical to the interpretation, repeatability, and reproduction of hPSC-CM studies. While flow cytometry is well suited for this purpose, a review of published literature reveals there is currently no consensus regarding which marker, antibody, or protocol is best suited to enable comparisons of hPSC-CM culture heterogeneity. Moreover, the lack of available experimental detail, combined with the variability in the approaches used for hPSC-CM evaluation, makes it challenging to reproduce, interpret, and compare published data. Consequently, this article calls for an alignment of the way researchers approach the routine use and documentation of the antibodies and controls used during flow cytometry-based assessment of hPSC-CM cultures. We advocate for the adoption of a “fit for purpose” validation mindset, whereby antibodies and experimental conditions are demonstrated as specific within a defined experimental design and biological context. Overall, we expect that by adhering to rigorous standards for antibody validation and use, reporting of experimental details, and presentation of data, the concepts emphasized here will promote enhanced utility and dialogue regarding hPSC-CM for a variety of research and translational applications by enabling more accurate comparisons of results among studies. Listen to this article's corresponding podcast at https://ajpheart.podbean.com/e/fit-for-purpose-approach-to-antibody-validation/ .


2000 ◽  
Vol 87 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 71-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Gopal ◽  
T. Gibbs ◽  
M.J. Slomka ◽  
J. Whitworth ◽  
L.M. Carpenter ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph J. Porter ◽  
Ryan A. Mehl

Posttranslational modifications resulting from oxidation of proteins (Ox-PTMs) are present intracellularly under conditions of oxidative stress as well as basal conditions. In the past, these modifications were thought to be generic protein damage, but it has become increasingly clear that Ox-PTMs can have specific physiological effects. It is an arduous task to distinguish between the two cases, as multiple Ox-PTMs occur simultaneously on the same protein, convoluting analysis. Genetic code expansion (GCE) has emerged as a powerful tool to overcome this challenge as it allows for the site-specific incorporation of an Ox-PTM into translated protein. The resulting homogeneously modified protein products can then be rigorously characterized for the effects of individual Ox-PTMs. We outline the strengths and weaknesses of GCE as they relate to the field of oxidative stress and Ox-PTMs. An overview of the Ox-PTMs that have been genetically encoded and applications of GCE to the study of Ox-PTMs, including antibody validation and therapeutic development, is described.


2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 582-592 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald Sjöberg ◽  
Cecilia Mattsson ◽  
Eni Andersson ◽  
Cecilia Hellström ◽  
Mathias Uhlen ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document