Aplicación de la ergonomía a los sistemas de trabajo de la Empresa AGROMASS SAC, para disminuir los riesgos disergonómicos – Chimbote, 2021

La presente investigación consideró como objetivo general la aplicación de la ergonomía a los sistemas de trabajo para disminuir los riesgos disergonómicos a los que están expuestos los colaboradores de la empresa Agromass SAC, Chimbote.Esta investigación es del tipo cuantitativo-aplicativo perteneciendo a un diseño experimental-preexperimental con pre test y post test. Como población se consideró a la empresa, conformada por todos los sistemas de trabajos de la empresa integrada por los trabajadores de la empresa, tanto de la oficina principal como la de las 5 tiendas, como muestreo se considera del tipo no probabilístico. Los resultados obtenidos evidencian la reduccion de los riesgos disergonómicos de la empresa en un 34.32%, garantizando la seguridad del trabajador en el lugar de trabajo y en las instalaciones de la empresa. Se concluye que los riesgos disergonomicos a los que estaban expuestos los trabajadores interferian de forma negativa en su bienestar y la salud física, mental o social del trabajador y su desarrollo profesional.Con estos resultados obtenidos se reafirma que la aplicación de la ergonomia si disminuye los riesgos disergonomicos en la empresa lo que resulta de mucho beneficio no solo para el trabajador sino tambien para la organización donde se realizó la investigación

Accurate Identification of ALK Positive Lung Carcinoma Patients: Novel FDA-Cleared Automated Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Scanning System and Ultrasensitive Immunohistochemistry

Background: Based on the excellent results of the clinical trials with ALK-inhibitors, the importance of accurately identifying ALK positive lung cancer has never been greater. However, there are increasing number of recent publications addressing discordances between FISH and IHC. The controversy is further fuelled by the different regulatory approvals. This situation prompted us to investigate two ALK IHC antibodies (using a novel ultrasensitive detection-amplification kit) and an automated ALK FISH scanning system (FDA-cleared) in a series of non-small cell lung cancer tumor samples. Methods: Forty-seven ALK FISH-positive and 56 ALK FISH-negative NSCLC samples were studied. All specimens were screened for ALK expression by two IHC antibodies (clone 5A4 from Novocastra and clone D5F3 from Ventana) and for ALK rearrangement by FISH (Vysis ALK FISH break-apart kit), which was automatically captured and scored by using Bioview's automated scanning system. Results: All positive cases with the IHC antibodies were FISH-positive. There was only one IHC-negative case with both antibodies which showed a FISH-positive result. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the IHC in comparison with FISH were 98% and 100%, respectively. Conclusions: The specificity of these ultrasensitive IHC assays may obviate the need for FISH confirmation in positive IHC cases. However, the likelihood of false negative IHC results strengthens the case for FISH testing, at least in some situation

Accurate identification of ALK positive lung carcinoma patients: novel FDA-cleared automated fluorescence in situ hybridization scanning system and ultrasensitive immunohistochemistry.

BACKGROUND: Based on the excellent results of the clinical trials with ALK-inhibitors, the importance of accurately identifying ALK positive lung cancer has never been greater. However, there are increasing number of recent publications addressing discordances between FISH and IHC. The controversy is further fuelled by the different regulatory approvals. This situation prompted us to investigate two ALK IHC antibodies (using a novel ultrasensitive detection-amplification kit) and an automated ALK FISH scanning system (FDA-cleared) in a series of non-small cell lung cancer tumor samples. METHODS: Forty-seven ALK FISH-positive and 56 ALK FISH-negative NSCLC samples were studied. All specimens were screened for ALK expression by two IHC antibodies (clone 5A4 from Novocastra and clone D5F3 from Ventana) and for ALK rearrangement by FISH (Vysis ALK FISH break-apart kit), which was automatically captured and scored by using Bioview's automated scanning system. RESULTS: All positive cases with the IHC antibodies were FISH-positive. There was only one IHC-negative case with both antibodies which showed a FISH-positive result. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the IHC in comparison with FISH were 98% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The specificity of these ultrasensitive IHC assays may obviate the need for FISH confirmation in positive IHC cases. However, the likelihood of false negative IHC results strengthens the case for FISH testing, at least in some situations

Accurate Identification of ALK Positive Lung Carcinoma Patients: Novel FDA-Cleared Automated Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Scanning System and Ultrasensitive Immunohistochemistry

Background: Based on the excellent results of the clinical trials with ALK-inhibitors, the importance of accurately identifying ALK positive lung cancer has never been greater. However, there are increasing number of recent publications addressing discordances between FISH and IHC. The controversy is further fuelled by the different regulatory approvals. This situation prompted us to investigate two ALK IHC antibodies (using a novel ultrasensitive detection-amplification kit) and an automated ALK FISH scanning system (FDA-cleared) in a series of non-small cell lung cancer tumor samples. Methods: Forty-seven ALK FISH-positive and 56 ALK FISH-negative NSCLC samples were studied. All specimens were screened for ALK expression by two IHC antibodies (clone 5A4 from Novocastra and clone D5F3 from Ventana) and for ALK rearrangement by FISH (Vysis ALK FISH break-apart kit), which was automatically captured and scored by using Bioview's automated scanning system. Results: All positive cases with the IHC antibodies were FISH-positive. There was only one IHC-negative case with both antibodies which showed a FISH-positive result. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the IHC in comparison with FISH were 98% and 100%, respectively. Conclusions: The specificity of these ultrasensitive IHC assays may obviate the need for FISH confirmation in positive IHC cases. However, the likelihood of false negative IHC results strengthens the case for FISH testing, at least in some situation

Concordance between ALK IHC and <i>ALK</i> FISH.

<p><i>IHC, immunohistochemistry; FISH, fluorescence in situ hybridization; CI, confidence interval; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value.</i></p><p>Concordance between ALK IHC and <i>ALK</i> FISH.</p

Box plots for number of <i>ALK</i> positive cells by FISH automatized technique versus intensity of the ALK IHC staining.

<p>With the Ventana anti-ALK antibody (A) and with Novocastra (5A4) antibody (B). Kruskal-Wallis test was performed. The comparisons between the categories in each antibody were statistically significant (p<0,001).</p

Study design and specimen selection.

<p>Study design and specimen selection.</p

Immunostaining pattern of ALK in NSCLC using Ventana anti-ALK (D5F3) and Novocastra (5A4) antibodies.

<p>ALK IHC reveals variable levels of protein expression: from absent (0) to weak/faint cytoplasmic staining (1+) in negative cases and from moderate (2+) to strong (3+) granular cytoplasmic immunstaining in positive tumors. In ALK IHC-negative cases, the immunoreactivity was always 0 by Novocastra (5A4) IHC, whereas ranged from 0 to 1+ by Ventana antibody. However, in ALK IHC-positive cases, protein expression was always 3+ by Ventana antibody, whereas it ranged from 2+ to 3+ by Novocastra (5A4) IHC. Original magnification: 400×.</p

Accurate Identification of ALK Positive Lung Carcinoma Patients: Novel FDA-Cleared Automated Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Scanning System and Ultrasensitive Immunohistochemistry

BackgroundBased on the excellent results of the clinical trials with ALK-inhibitors, the importance of accurately identifying ALK positive lung cancer has never been greater. However, there are increasing number of recent publications addressing discordances between FISH and IHC. The controversy is further fuelled by the different regulatory approvals. This situation prompted us to investigate two ALK IHC antibodies (using a novel ultrasensitive detection-amplification kit) and an automated ALK FISH scanning system (FDA-cleared) in a series of non-small cell lung cancer tumor samples.MethodsForty-seven ALK FISH-positive and 56 ALK FISH-negative NSCLC samples were studied. All specimens were screened for ALK expression by two IHC antibodies (clone 5A4 from Novocastra and clone D5F3 from Ventana) and for ALK rearrangement by FISH (Vysis ALK FISH break-apart kit), which was automatically captured and scored by using Bioview's automated scanning system.ResultsAll positive cases with the IHC antibodies were FISH-positive. There was only one IHC-negative case with both antibodies which showed a FISH-positive result. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the IHC in comparison with FISH were 98% and 100%, respectively.ConclusionsThe specificity of these ultrasensitive IHC assays may obviate the need for FISH confirmation in positive IHC cases. However, the likelihood of false negative IHC results strengthens the case for FISH testing, at least in some situations