ArticleJournal of molecular histology2004
Comparison of chromogenic in situ hybridization with other methodologies for HER2 status assessment in breast cancer.
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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of Immunohistochemistry-Equivocal (2+) HER2 Gene Status in Invasive Breast Cancer by Silver DNA in Situ Hybridization (SISH) and its Association with Clinicopathological Variables.Iranian journal of pathology · 2017Article
- 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 · 2013Review
- The 70-gene prognostic signature for korean breast cancer patients.Journal of breast cancer · 2011Article
- Prospective multi-centre study to validate chromogenic in situ hybridisation for the assessment of HER2 gene amplification in specimens from adjuvant and metastatic breast cancer patients.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2011Article
- 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
- Quantitative real-time RT-PCR and chromogenic in situ hybridization: precise methods to detect HER-2 status in breast carcinoma.BMC cancer · 2009Article
- Comparison of chromogenic in situ hybridisation with fluorescence in situ hybridisation and immunohistochemistry for the assessment of her-2/neu oncogene in archival material of breast carcinoma.Acta histochemica et cytochemica · 2008Article
- Her-2/neu amplification and breast cancer survival: results from the Shanghai breast cancer study.Oncology reports · 2008Article
- Chromogenic in situ hybridisation (CISH) should be an accepted method in the routine diagnostic evaluation of HER2 status in breast cancer.Journal of clinical pathology · 2007Article
- Development of Targeted Therapies in ErbB2-Positive Breast Cancer.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland)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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.