ArticleMedicine2014
A qualitative study comparing the assay performance characteristics between the 2007 and the 2013 American Society for Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists HER2 scoring methods in mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer.
Article in Medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing the 2017 ASCO/CAP guideline for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma surgical specimen to the 2018 ASCO/CAP guideline for breast cancer in assessing the HER2 status in primary mucinous ovarian carcinoma.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2022Article
- Review
- 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 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The remarkable success of trastuzumab and other newly developed anti-HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) therapies in breast, gastric, or gastroesophageal junction cancer patients has supported us to investigate the HER2 status and its possible therapeutic implication in mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). However, there is currently no standardization of HER2 scoring criteria in mucinous EOC. In this study, we aimed to compare both the assay performance characteristics of the 2007 and the 2013 American Society for Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists scoring methods. Forty-nine tissue microarray samples of mucinous EOC from Asian women were analyzed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) tests using the 2007 and the 2013 criteria, respectively. The overall concordance between IHC and FISH by the 2007 criteria was 97.92 % (kappa = 0.921), and that by the 2013 criteria was 100% (kappa = 1.000). The percentage of Her2 FISH-amplified cases showed an increasing trend significantly through their corresponding HER2 IHC ordinals by the 2007 and the 2013 criteria, respectively (P < 0.001, P < 0.001). After excluding equivocal cases, the specificity (100%) and positive predictive value (100%) were unchanged under either the 2007 or the 2013 criteria. The sensitivity (100%), negative predictive value (NPV) (100%), and accuracy (100%) of HER2 IHC were higher under the 2013 criteria than those (sensitivity 87.5%, NPV 97.6%, and accuracy 97.9%) under the 2007 criteria. Of the total 49 cases, the number (n = 4) of HER2 IHC equivocal results under the 2013 criteria was 4-fold higher than that (n = 1) under the 2007 criteria (8.16% vs 2.04%). Conclusively, if first tested by IHC, the 2013 criteria caused more equivocal HER2 IHC cases to be referred to Her2 FISH testing than the 2007 criteria. That decreased the false-negative rate of HER2 status and increased the detection rates of HER2 positivity in mucinous EOC.
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.