Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 122

1.

Comparison of Chromogenic In Situ Hybridization and Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization for the Evaluation of MDM2 Amplification in Adipocytic Tumors.

Mardekian SK, Solomides CC, Gong JZ, Peiper SC, Wang ZX, Bajaj R.

J Clin Lab Anal. 2015 Nov;29(6):462-8. doi: 10.1002/jcla.21794. Epub 2014 Aug 17.

PMID:
25132285
2.

Detection of MDM2-CDK4 amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization in 200 paraffin-embedded tumor samples: utility in diagnosing adipocytic lesions and comparison with immunohistochemistry and real-time PCR.

Sirvent N, Coindre JM, Maire G, Hostein I, Keslair F, Guillou L, Ranchere-Vince D, Terrier P, Pedeutour F.

Am J Surg Pathol. 2007 Oct;31(10):1476-89.

PMID:
17895748
3.

Detection of MDM2/CDK4 amplification in lipomatous soft tissue tumors from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue: comparison of multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH).

Creytens D, van Gorp J, Ferdinande L, Speel EJ, Libbrecht L.

Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2015 Feb;23(2):126-33. doi: 10.1097/PDM.0000000000000041.

PMID:
25679065
4.

MDM2 and CDK4 immunostainings are useful adjuncts in diagnosing well-differentiated and dedifferentiated liposarcoma subtypes: a comparative analysis of 559 soft tissue neoplasms with genetic data.

Binh MB, Sastre-Garau X, Guillou L, de Pinieux G, Terrier P, Lagacé R, Aurias A, Hostein I, Coindre JM.

Am J Surg Pathol. 2005 Oct;29(10):1340-7.

PMID:
16160477
5.

Fluorescence in situ hybridization for MDM2 gene amplification as a diagnostic tool in lipomatous neoplasms.

Weaver J, Downs-Kelly E, Goldblum JR, Turner S, Kulkarni S, Tubbs RR, Rubin BP, Skacel M.

Mod Pathol. 2008 Aug;21(8):943-9. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2008.84. Epub 2008 May 23.

6.

Are peripheral purely undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcomas with MDM2 amplification dedifferentiated liposarcomas?

Le Guellec S, Chibon F, Ouali M, Perot G, Decouvelaere AV, Robin YM, Larousserie F, Terrier P, Coindre JM, Neuville A.

Am J Surg Pathol. 2014 Mar;38(3):293-304. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000131.

PMID:
24525499
7.

Sensitivity of MDM2 amplification and unexpected multiple faint alphoid 12 (alpha 12 satellite sequences) signals in atypical lipomatous tumor.

Kashima T, Halai D, Ye H, Hing SN, Delaney D, Pollock R, O'Donnell P, Tirabosco R, Flanagan AM.

Mod Pathol. 2012 Oct;25(10):1384-96. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2012.90. Epub 2012 Jun 15.

8.
9.

Automated Bright-Field Dual-Color In Situ Hybridization for MDM2: Interobserver Reproducibility and Correlation With Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization in a Series of Soft Tissue Consults.

Zhang G, Lanigan CP, Goldblum JR, Tubbs RR, Downs-Kelly E.

Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2016 Oct;140(10):1111-5. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2015-0249-OA.

PMID:
27684983
10.

Utility of fluorescence in situ hybridization to detect MDM2 amplification in liposarcomas and their morphological mimics.

Kimura H, Dobashi Y, Nojima T, Nakamura H, Yamamoto N, Tsuchiya H, Ikeda H, Sawada-Kitamura S, Oyama T, Ooi A.

Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2013 Jun 15;6(7):1306-16. Print 2013.

11.

Detection of MDM2 gene amplification or protein expression distinguishes sclerosing mesenteritis and retroperitoneal fibrosis from inflammatory well-differentiated liposarcoma.

Weaver J, Goldblum JR, Turner S, Tubbs RR, Wang WL, Lazar AJ, Rubin BP.

Mod Pathol. 2009 Jan;22(1):66-70. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2008.153. Epub 2008 Oct 3.

12.

MDM2 Amplification in Problematic Lipomatous Tumors: Analysis of FISH Testing Criteria.

Clay MR, Martinez AP, Weiss SW, Edgar MA.

Am J Surg Pathol. 2015 Oct;39(10):1433-9. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000468.

PMID:
26146760
13.

The value of MDM2 and CDK4 amplification levels using real-time polymerase chain reaction for the differential diagnosis of liposarcomas and their histologic mimickers.

Shimada S, Ishizawa T, Ishizawa K, Matsumura T, Hasegawa T, Hirose T.

Hum Pathol. 2006 Sep;37(9):1123-9. Epub 2006 Jul 7.

PMID:
16938516
14.

Carboxypeptidase M: a biomarker for the discrimination of well-differentiated liposarcoma from lipoma.

Erickson-Johnson MR, Seys AR, Roth CW, King AA, Hulshizer RL, Wang X, Asmann YW, Lloyd RV, Jacob EK, Oliveira AM.

Mod Pathol. 2009 Dec;22(12):1541-7. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2009.149. Epub 2009 Oct 9.

15.

Automated brightfield dual-color in situ hybridization for detection of mouse double minute 2 gene amplification in sarcomas.

Zhang W, McElhinny A, Nielsen A, Wang M, Miller M, Singh S, Rueger R, Rubin BP, Wang Z, Tubbs RR, Nagle RB, Roche P, Wu P, Pestic-Dragovich L.

Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2011 Jan;19(1):54-61. doi: 10.1097/PAI.0b013e3181ee8e14.

PMID:
20881839
16.

Overlapping features between dedifferentiated liposarcoma and undifferentiated high-grade pleomorphic sarcoma.

Chung L, Lau SK, Jiang Z, Loera S, Bedel V, Ji J, Weiss LM, Chu PG.

Am J Surg Pathol. 2009 Nov;33(11):1594-600. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3181accb01.

PMID:
19574885
17.
18.

Identification of MYCN gene amplification in neuroblastoma using chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH): an alternative and practical method.

Bhargava R, Oppenheimer O, Gerald W, Jhanwar SC, Chen B.

Diagn Mol Pathol. 2005 Jun;14(2):72-6.

PMID:
15905689
19.

[HER-2 oncogene amplification assessment in invasive breast cancer by dual-color in situ hybridization (dc-CISH): a comparative study with fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH)].

Akhdar A, Bronsard M, Lemieux R, Geha S.

Ann Pathol. 2011 Dec;31(6):472-9. doi: 10.1016/j.annpat.2011.10.013. Epub 2011 Nov 26. Review. French.

PMID:
22172120
20.

Clinical and biological significance of CDK4 amplification in well-differentiated and dedifferentiated liposarcomas.

Italiano A, Bianchini L, Gjernes E, Keslair F, Ranchere-Vince D, Dumollard JM, Haudebourg J, Leroux A, Mainguené C, Terrier P, Chibon F, Coindre JM, Pedeutour F.

Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Sep 15;15(18):5696-703. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-3185. Epub 2009 Sep 8.

Supplemental Content

Support Center