JVDI Advertisement
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vilches-Moure, J.
Right arrow Articles by Ramos-Vara, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vilches-Moure, J.
Right arrow Articles by Ramos-Vara, J.
Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation, Vol 17, Issue 4, 346-350
Copyright © 2005 by American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians


Articles

Comparison of rabbit monoclonal and mouse monoclonal antibodies in immunohistochemistry in canine tissues

JG Vilches-Moure and JA Ramos-Vara

Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory, and Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906, USA.

Rabbit monoclonal (RM) antibodies appear to have higher affinity for antigens than mouse monoclonal (MM) antibodies. However, RM antibodies have not been used in veterinary diagnostic immunohistochemistry. The authors compared reactivities of RM and MM antibodies on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded canine tissues, targeting 11 different antigens: CD3, CD79a, calcitonin, calretinin, chromogranin A, COX-2, estrogen receptor, Ki67, progesterone receptor, synaptophysin, and vimentin. Paraffin-embedded tissue sections were processed by 1 of 2 antigen-retrieval methods: 1) proteinase K digestion or 2) steam heat in citrate buffer. An additional set of slides did not receive antigen retrieval. Immunostaining was performed using an automated stainer, and scores were assigned to the different dilutions and antigen-retrieval methods on the basis of staining intensity and number of positive cells. Steam heat was usually the best antigen-retrieval method. The optimal dilution for each antibody was that which resulted in the highest specific staining and the lowest nonspecific (background) staining. The RM or MM antibodies yielded a specific reaction for all antigens examined except calretinin. The RM and MM antibodies yielded a specific reaction for 4 antigens only: COX-2, Ki67, synaptophysin, and vimentin. Three antigens (CD3, chromogranin A, and progesterone receptor) were detected only with RM antibodies, whereas the other 3 (CD79a, calcitonin, estrogen receptor) were detected only with MM antibodies. The results of this study differed from those reported for human tissues by the manufacturers of the antibodies. These results emphasize that, regardless of manufacturers' recommendations, each antibody must be individually standardized and validated before routine use in canine tissues.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Vet PatholHome page
P. Mouser, M. Levy, J. E. Sojka, and J. A. Ramos-Vara
Cerebellar Abiotrophy in an Alpaca (Lama pacos)
Vet. Pathol., November 1, 2009; 46(6): 1133 - 1137.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
jvdiHome page
J. A. Ramos-Vara, M. Kiupel, T. Baszler, L. Bliven, B. Brodersen, B. Chelack, S. Czub, F. D. Piero, S. Dial, E.J. Ehrhart, et al.
Suggested guidelines for immunohistochemical techniques in veterinary diagnostic laboratories
J Vet Diagn Invest, July 1, 2008; 20(4): 393 - 413.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc.