ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2021
Assessment of HER2 using the 2018 ASCO/CAP guideline update for invasive breast cancer: a critical look at cases classified as HER2 2+ by immunohistochemistry.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2021. 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.
- Personalized prediction of breast cancer candidates for Anti-HER2 therapy usingFrontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Clinicopathologic Correlation of CD44 + /CD24 - Expression in Breast Cancer: a Report from Tertiary Care Medical University in India.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Patterns and Prevalence ofCancer management and research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2018, the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists revised the criteria for HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) equivocal (2+) classification in their updated guideline. We reviewed invasive breast cancer specimens originally classified as equivocal (2+) under the 2018 guideline that underwent HER2 fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) testing from August 2018 to August 2019 at our Canadian reference hospital to investigate cases with ambiguous staining patterns between the 1+ and 2+ definitions. Demographics, pathologic features, and pre-analytic conditions were recorded. The H&E and corresponding HER2 IHC slides were reviewed to confirm tumor type and grade, and classify as HER2 indeterminate, 0, 1+, 2+, or "Intermediate" (staining features between the 1+ and 2+ classifications). FISH testing was performed on 289 cases and 273 met inclusion criteria. The FISH-amplified rate was 12.1%. Upon IHC review, 44.7% (122/273) of cases were reclassified as Intermediate. These cases had incomplete staining with moderate intensity (43/122, 35.3%) and/or <10% complete weak or moderate staining (102/122, 83.6%). Intermediate cases had a significantly lower frequency of amplified FISH results than 2+ cases (p < 0.0001), with only four (3.3%) FISH positive and two (1.6%) FISH heterogeneous. Our study highlights the ambiguity in the current guideline for classifying some HER2 IHC patterns. As the rate of gene amplification in these cases was low (4.9%), we recommend adhering to the 2018 HER2 2+ criteria for reflex FISH testing. However, cases with <10% moderate complete staining and certain heterogeneous patterns warrant special consideration. Further descriptive clarification of 1+ criteria is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33527151What 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.