Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15614619›Full record

ArticleJournal of molecular histology2004

Comparison of chromogenic in situ hybridization with other methodologies for HER2 status assessment in breast cancer.

Cornelia Hauser-Kronberger, Nadia Dandachi

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Chromogenic in situ hybridization compared with other approaches to evaluate HER2/neu status in breast carcinomas.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2013
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Cornelia Hauser-KronbergerDepartment of Pathology, St. Johann's Hospital Salzburg, Muellner Hauptstrasse 48, A-5020 Salzburg, Austria.
Nadia Dandachi
Unfallkrankenhaus Salzburg · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The high incidence of human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)2 overexpression on breast and various other cancer cells and the prognostic and potentially predictive value of HER2 render this growth receptor a novel and important therapeutic target. Out of a wide range of assays that have been used in research for the detection of HER2 status, only two techniques are now predominant and readily applicable in the routine clinical pathology laboratory: determination of HER2 overexpression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and HER2 gene amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH). In a retrospective study on a cohort of 173 archival invasive breast carcinomas a chromogenic in situ hybridisation (CISH) assay for the detection of HER2 amplification was established. Results were compared to HercepTest, which is the most frequently used method for detecting HER2 alteration. Additionally, HER2 gene copy number was investigated using differential PCR (dPCR) as a testing system. Discrepant cases between CISH and HercepTest and all IHC positive cases (2 + and 3 +), a total of 42 cases, were analysed with FISH Path Vysion(Vysis) assay. HER2 overexpression was found by IHC in 24.3%, HER2 amplification by CISH in 19.1% and by dPCR in 9.2% of the tumours. The overall concordance rate between CISH and IHC was 95.9%, between dPCR and IHC 85% and between CISH and FISH 100%, respectively. Among 25 HercepTest positive cases (score 3+) two showed no gene amplification and four out of 13 tumours with score 2 + were negative with CISH and FISH. The current study showed that CISH offers an ideal approach that allows detection of HER2 amplification in the context of morphology, whereas the major drawback of dPCR is the impracticability of tissue differentiation of invasive and non-invasive carcinoma.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsGenes, erbB-2FemaleGene AmplificationHumansIn Situ HybridizationPrognosisRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID15614619
OpenAlexW358780564

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.