This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

LEIF KLINKEN, MD, PHD; JENS THOMSEN, MD, PHD; BIRGITTE BRUUN RASMUSSEN, MD, PHD
Copenhagen, Denmark

RICHARD J. WIET, MD
Chicago, Ill

MIRKO TOS, MD, PHD
Copenhagen, Denmark

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1990;116(9):1092.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.—Thank you for the opportunity to answer Dr Monsell's letter. Dr Monsell argues that the immunohistochemical (ERICA) method used by us¹ is less sensitive than the one used by Monsell and Wiet.² We do not quite understand which method actually was used by Monsell and Wiet. If the method used was a radioligand assay, the dextran-coated charcoal method with Scatchard plot analysis, there is nothing in the literature indicating that this method is more sensitive than the ERICA assay. As an example, hormone receptors have never been detected biochemically in benign and normal breast tissue. However, such tissue does have cells, although often few, that react positively in immunohistochemical assays.³ On the other hand, if the method used was an enzyme immunoassay, this method is found to be more sensitive than the dextran-coated charcoal assay,4 but again, there is nothing in the literature indicating . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?