ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2024
Navigating HER2-Low Testing in Invasive Breast Cancer: Update Recommendations for Pathologists.
Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Targeted Therapy for Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Low Tumors: From Trastuzumab to Antibody-Drug Conjugates.World journal of oncology · 2026Review
- Transformer-BasedDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Creation and Characterization of a Breast Cancer Tissue Microarray Including Black and White Patients from Florida and Hispanic Patients from Puerto Rico and Florida.Cancer research communications · 2025Article
- Efficacy of Trastuzumab Deruxtecan in HER2-Positive and HER2-Low Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study in China.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2025Article
- The "lows": Update on ER-low and HER2-low breast cancer.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The article discusses the importance of accurately distinguishing HER2-low from HER2-negative breast cancer, as novel ADCs have demonstrated activity in a large population of patients with HER2-low-expressing BC. While current guidelines recommend a dichotomous classification of HER2 as either positive or negative, the emergence of the HER2-low concept calls for standardization of HER2 testing in breast cancer, using currently available assays to better discriminate HER2 levels. This review covers the evolution and latest updates of the ASCO/CAP guidelines relevant to this important biomarker in breast cancer, including still-evolving concepts such as HER2 low, HER2 heterogeneity, and HER2 evolution. Our group presents the latest Mexican recommendations for HER2 status evaluation in breast cancer, considering the ASCO/CAP guidelines and introducing the HER2-low concept. In the era of personalized medicine, accurate HER2 status assessment remains one of the most important biomarkers in breast cancer, and the commitment of Mexican pathologists to theragnostic biomarker quality is crucial for providing the most efficient care in oncology.
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.