Immunohistochemical staining and IHC score

SC Shuang Chen
KL Kang Li
XZ Xinqi Zhong
GW Ganping Wang
XW Xiaocheng Wang
MC Maosheng Cheng
JC Jie Chen
ZC Zhi Chen
JC Jianwen Chen
CZ Caihua Zhang
GX Gan Xiong
XX Xiuyun Xu
DC Demeng Chen
HL Heping Li
LP Liang Peng
request Request a Protocol
ask Ask a question
Favorite

For immunological analyses, 3–5-μm microtome sections were deparaffinized for 30 min and rehydrated with gradient alcohol. Then, the endogenous peroxidase activity of the sections was quenched with 3% H2O2, and heat-induced epitope retrieval was performed. The sections were incubated with primary antibodies targeting the following proteins at 4 °C overnight: SOX9 (1:200; Millipore, AB5535), Ki67 (1:500; Novus, NB500170), CD45 (1:200; Santa Cruz, sc-53665), α-SMA (1:200; CST,19245S), PDPN (1:200; abcam, ab256559), CC10 (1:200; Santa Cruz, sc-365992), Caspase-3 (1:200; CST, 9661S), SOX2 (1:300; abcam, ab97959), Oct3/4 (1:300; BD, BD611203), Klf4 (1:300; CST, 12173S) and cMyc (1:300; CST, 5605S). The specimens were washed with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) three times prior to incubation with secondary antibodies targeting the primary antibodies for 30 min at 37 °C. For enzymatic assays, a horseradish peroxidase (HRP) conjugate was used for detection. The IHC score was calculated by multiplying the percentage of positive cells by the intensity. The intensity was scored as 0 (negative), 1+ (weak staining), 2+ (moderate staining) or 3+ (strong staining), while the frequency was scored according to the proportion of positive cells.

Do you have any questions about this protocol?

Post your question to gather feedback from the community. We will also invite the authors of this article to respond.

post Post a Question
0 Q&A