ArticleJournal of molecular histology2004
Novel bright field molecular morphology methods for detection of HER2 gene amplification.
Article in Journal of molecular histology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Texture Analysis of Breast DCE-MRI Based on Intratumoral Subregions for Predicting HER2 2+ Status.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- A novel gene-protein assay for evaluating HER2 status in gastric cancer: simultaneous analyses of HER2 protein overexpression and gene amplification reveal intratumoral heterogeneity.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2015Article
- The validation of a novel method combining both HER2 immunohistochemistry and HER2 dual-colour silver in situ hybridization on one slide for gastric carcinoma testing.Journal of translational medicine · 2014Article
- Article
- Out of the darkness and into the light: bright field in situ hybridisation for delineation of ERBB2 (HER2) status in breast carcinoma.Journal of clinical pathology · 2010Review
- Delineation of HER2 gene status in breast carcinoma by silver in situ hybridization is reproducible among laboratories and pathologists.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2008Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Profiling the amplification and over-expression of the HER2 gene is a key component for defining the prognosis and management of invasive breast carcinoma. Clinical laboratory testing for HER2 gene amplification and over expression has been complicated by an unacceptably high rate of false positive immunohistochemistry (IHC) results, poor reproducibility for the '2+' category of IHC scoring, and reluctant acceptance of alternative testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) by the diagnostic pathology community. Novel chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH) assays have been developed that utilize bright field microscopy and a conventional light microscope for interpretation, but the analytical sensitivity of first generation CISH systems has been problematic. Novel second generation in situ hybridization detection methods based upon polymerized lg detection chemistry, autometallography or enzyme metallography, have been developed that routinely detect endogenous HER2 signals in normal cells (on slide hybridization control) and HER2 signals in both non-amplified and amplified patterns of HER2 genomic signatures. By combining the strength of polymerized peroxidase-labeled antibodies and metallography for gene amplification, with the detection of expression of HER2 encoded protein by IHC on the same slide, both HER2 gene amplification and protein over-expression can be simultaneously evaluated on a cell-by-cell basis in each microscopic field of carcinoma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.