Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 1, 2026

Quantitation of Protein Expression and Co-localization Using Multiplexed Immuno-histochemical Staining and Multispectral Imaging
Published on: April 8, 2016
Base-rate error in the interpretation of immunohistochemistry
1Department of Cellular Pathology, Royal Free Hospital, Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust, Pond Street, Hampstead, London, NW3 2QG, UK.
Abstract:
Failure to appreciate the importance of the frequency of a disorder in the appropriate population (the base rate) may lead to the misinterpretation of the diagnostic significance of unexpected test results (unexpected test result defined in this context as a test result that is positive in a higher proportion of cases of an alternative diagnosis than in the diagnosis considered most likely before the test). This study aimed to determine whether pathologists are vulnerable to this error. Pathologists were asked to estimate the probability of tumour B in a scenario in which, prior to the immunostaining result, an experienced pathologist considers there to be a 99% chance that the patient has tumour A and a 1% chance that they have tumour B. Antibody X is positive in 80% of cases of tumour B and negative in 90% of cases of tumour A and is positive in the case described in the scenario. The estimates made by consultant pathologists ranged from 0 to 100% (mean 29.7%). The Bayesian answer would be 7.5%. These findings suggest that base-rate error may lead some pathologists to overestimate the implications for the likelihood of a diagnosis in the light of an unexpected immunohistochemical result.
More Related Videos
09:58Quantitative Immunoblotting of Cell Lines as a Standard to Validate Immunofluorescence for Quantifying Biomarker Proteins in Routine Tissue Samples
Published on: January 7, 2019
07:54Heterogeneity Mapping of Protein Expression in Tumors using Quantitative Immunofluorescence
Published on: October 25, 2011