ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2012
Serum HER2 levels determined by two methods in patients with metastatic breast cancer.
Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical significance of glycoprotein nonmetastatic B and its association with HER2 in breast cancer.Cancer medicine · 2015Article
- Challenges in the clinical utility of the serum test for HER2 ECD.Biochimica et biophysica acta · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe role and the optimal measurement method of serum HER2 levels are not defined in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We prospectively assessed the prognostic value of serum HER2 levels in MBC using two methods, enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA).
methodsWe collected blood samples from patients with MBC at baseline and at subsequent 3- to 4-week intervals up to 12 weeks. Samples were divided, and serum HER2 levels were determined using EIA and CLIA. We also determined whether serum HER2 levels had decreased by ≥20% at first follow-up. These results were evaluated against overall survival, progression-free survival, and tumor response.
resultsWe obtained 196 samples from 52 patients. In 59 samples from patients who received trastuzumab, serum HER2 positivity rates were significantly lower for EIA (n = 22) than for CLIA (n = 33, P = 0.042); in 137 samples from patients who did not receive trastuzumab, there was no significant difference in rates of serum HER2 positivity for CLIA (n = 83) and EIA (n = 80). Serum HER2 level at baseline, the level at first follow-up, and a decrease of ≥20% between baseline and first follow-up were not associated with overall survival, progression-free survival, and tumor response.
conclusionsChemiluminescence immunoassay was a more sensitive method than EIA for measuring serum HER2 levels in patients who received trastuzumab. However, because serum HER2 levels did not correlate with patient outcome, we do not currently recommend measuring serum HER2 levels by either method for prognostic evaluation in patients with MBC.
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.