Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37946261›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2023

High inter-laboratory variability in the assessment of HER2-low breast cancer: a national registry study on 50,714 Danish patients.

Kåre Nielsen, Michael Sode, Maj-Britt Jensen, Tobias Berg, Ann Knoop, Bent Ejlertsen, Anne-Vibeke Lænkholm

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Repurposing HER2 IHC: Pan-HER2 and Low-HER2.Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Toward Optimizing the Impact of Digital Pathology and Augmented Intelligence on Issues of Diagnosis, Grading, Staging, and Classification.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Recent advances and updated highlights in breast cancer pathologic diagnosis: a narrative review.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Kåre NielsenDepartment of Pathology, Zealand University Hospital, Sygehusvej 9, 4000, Roskilde, Denmark. gpl617@sund.ku.dk.ORCID 0000-0002-4808-6929
Michael SodeDepartment of Pathology, Zealand University Hospital, Sygehusvej 9, 4000, Roskilde, Denmark.
Maj-Britt JensenDanish Breast Cancer Group, DBCG, Rigshospitalet (Copenhagen University Hospital), Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Tobias BergDanish Breast Cancer Group, DBCG, Rigshospitalet (Copenhagen University Hospital), Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ann KnoopUniversity of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 3B, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Bent EjlertsenUniversity of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 3B, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anne-Vibeke LænkholmDepartment of Pathology, Zealand University Hospital, Sygehusvej 9, 4000, Roskilde, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConsidering the recent advancements in the treatment of breast cancer with low expression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), we aimed to examine inter-laboratory variability in the assessment of HER2-low breast cancer across all Danish pathology departments.

methodsFrom the Danish Breast Cancer Group, we obtained data on all women diagnosed with primary invasive breast cancer in 2007-2019 who were subsequently assigned for curatively intended treatment.

resultsOf 50,714 patients, HER2 score and status were recorded for 48,382, among whom 59.2% belonged to the HER2-low group (score 1+ or 2+ without gene amplification), 26.8% had a HER2 score of 0, and 14.0% were HER2 positive. The proportion of HER2-low cases ranged from 46.3 to 71.8% among pathology departments (P < 0.0001) and from 49.3 to 65.6% over the years (P < 0.0001). In comparison, HER2 positivity rates ranged from 11.8 to 17.2% among departments (P < 0.0001) and from 12.6 to 15.7% over the years (P = 0.005). In the eight departments with the highest number of patients, variability in HER2-low cases increased from 2011 to 2019, although the same immunohistochemical assay was used. By multivariable logistic regression, the examining department was significantly related to both HER2 score 0 and HER2 positivity (P < 0.0001) but showed greater dispersion in odds ratios in the former case (range 0.25-1.41 vs. 0.84-1.27).

conclusionsOur data showed high inter-laboratory variability in the assessment of HER2-low breast cancer. The findings cast doubt on whether the current test method for HER2 is robust and reliable enough to select HER2-low patients for HER2-targeted treatment in daily clinical practice.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsDenmarkErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleHumansRegistriesErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesBreast cancerHER2 lowHuman epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)ImmunohistochemistryReproducibilityVariability

Identifiers

PMID37946261
PMCPMC10636935

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.