|
Agendia BV
ffpe microarray test ![]() Ffpe Microarray Test, supplied by Agendia BV, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more https://www.bioz.com/result/ffpe microarray test/product/Agendia BV Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
ffpe microarray test - by Bioz Stars,
2026-04
90/100 stars
|
Buy from Supplier |
Journal: Translational Oncology
Article Title: Decentralization of Next-Generation RNA Sequencing-Based MammaPrint® and BluePrint® Kit at University Hospitals Leuven and Curie Institute Paris
doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2019.08.008
Figure Lengend Snippet: MammaPrint (MP) microarray indices assessed at Agendia Amsterdam central laboratory in comparison to MP NGS indices at the beta sites. The comparison shows equivalence between the two technologies (Pearson's r = 0.96). The x-axis reports the MP microarray index, the y-axis reports the MP NGS index. Each dot represents a single breast cancer sample for which total RNA underwent microarray and NGS laboratory processing and analysis. The blue dots represent the discordant cases with indices close to the classification threshold.
Article Snippet: The current MP and BP
Techniques: Microarray, Comparison
Journal: Translational Oncology
Article Title: Decentralization of Next-Generation RNA Sequencing-Based MammaPrint® and BluePrint® Kit at University Hospitals Leuven and Curie Institute Paris
doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2019.08.008
Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of test outcomes from MammaPrint (High/Low Risk) between microarray assessed at Agendia Amsterdam central laboratory and NGS assessed at the beta sites. These results show a Negative Predictive Agreement (Low Risk) of 93.8% (60/64, 95% CI: 85.0–97.5), a Positive Predictive Agreement (High Risk) of 88.3% (53/60, 95% CI: 77.8–94.2), a concordance of 91.1% and a Cohen's kappa of 0.82.
Article Snippet: The current MP and BP
Techniques: Comparison, Microarray
∗ ) ( D ). These results show a concordance of 71.8% (89/124) ( A ), 76.6% (95/124) ( B ), 89.5% (111/124) ( C ) and 93.9% (107/114) ( D )." width="100%" height="100%">
Journal: Translational Oncology
Article Title: Decentralization of Next-Generation RNA Sequencing-Based MammaPrint® and BluePrint® Kit at University Hospitals Leuven and Curie Institute Paris
doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2019.08.008
Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of molecular subtyping using MP and BP tests (Luminal A for Low Risk MP and Luminal B for High Risk) between NGS Beta Site and IHC according to Prat et al. (n = 124) ( A ), between NGS Beta Site and IHC according to Maisonneuve et al. (n = 124) ( B ), between NGS Beta Site and microarray Agendia (n = 124) ( C ), and between NGS Beta Site and NGS Agendia (n = 114
Article Snippet: The current MP and BP
Techniques: Comparison, Microarray
Journal: Translational Oncology
Article Title: Decentralization of Next-Generation RNA Sequencing-Based MammaPrint® and BluePrint® Kit at University Hospitals Leuven and Curie Institute Paris
doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2019.08.008
Figure Lengend Snippet: MammaPrint (MP) NGS indices assessed at Agendia Amsterdam central laboratory in comparison to MP NGS at the beta sites. The comparison shows equivalence between MP NGS performed at Agendia (x-axis) and MP NGS at the beta sites (y-axis) (Pearson's r = 0.96) (n = 114). Each dot represents a single breast cancer sample for which total RNA underwent NGS or microarray laboratory processing and analysis. Out of the 124 samples processed on NGS, 10 samples lacked NGS results at Agendia. The blue dots represent the discordant cases with indices close to the classification threshold.
Article Snippet: The current MP and BP
Techniques: Comparison, Microarray