Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39792693›Full record

ArticleAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)2025

Artificial Intelligence for Predicting HER2 Status of Gastric Cancer Based on Whole-Slide Histopathology Images: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.

Yuhan Liao, Xinhua Chen, Shupeng Hu, Bing Chen, Xinghua Zhuo, Hao Xu, Xiaojin Wu, Xiaofeng Zeng, Huimin Zeng, Donghui Zhang and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Immune niche composed of C1QNature communications · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Biomechanics-Driven 3D Architecture Inference from Histology Using CellSqueeze3D.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

12 authors.

Yuhan LiaoDepartment of Pathology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Xinhua ChenDepartment of General Surgery, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Shupeng HuSchool of Computer Science, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Bing ChenDepartment of Pathology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Xinghua ZhuoDepartment of Pathology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Hao XuDepartment of Pathology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.
Xiaojin WuDepartment of Pathology, Shunde Hospital of Southern Medical University (The First People's Hospital of Shunde), Foshan, Guangdong, 528399, China.
Xiaofeng ZengDepartment of Pathology, Shunde Hospital of Southern Medical University (The First People's Hospital of Shunde), Foshan, Guangdong, 528399, China.
Huimin ZengDepartment of Pathology, Shunde Hospital of Southern Medical University (The First People's Hospital of Shunde), Foshan, Guangdong, 528399, China.
Donghui ZhangDepartment of Pathology, Affiliated Cancer Hospital and Institute of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, 510095, China.
Yunfei ZhiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, 100730, China.
Liang ZhaoDepartment of Pathology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1429-0884

Funding

Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation 2021B1515120001Guangzhou Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation 2024A04J6605
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive gastric cancer (GC) shows a robust response to the combined therapy based HER2-targeted therapy. The application of these therapies is highly dependent on the evaluation of tumor HER2 status. However, there are many risks and challenges in HER2 assessment in GC. Therefore, an economically viable and readily available instrument is requisite for distinguishing HER2 status among patients diagnosed with GC. The study has innovatively developed a deep learning model, HER2Net, which can predict the HER2 status by quantitatively calculating the proportion of HER2 high-expression regions. The HER2Net is trained on an internal training set derived from 531 hematoxylin & eosin (H&E) whole slide images (WSI) of 520 patients. Subsequently, the performance of HER2Net is validated on an internal test set from 115 H&E WSI of 111 patients and an external multi-center test set from 102 H&E WSI of 101 patients. The HER2Net achieves an accuracy of 0.9043 on the internal test set, and an accuracy of 0.8922 on an external test set from multiple institutes. This discovery indicates that the HER2Net can potentially offer a novel methodology for the identification of HER2-positive GC.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesStomach NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorDeep LearningFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesBiomarkers, TumorERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine Kinasesdeep learning modelgastric cancerhuman epidermal growth factor receptor 2whole slide images

Identifiers

PMID39792693
PMCPMC11904990

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.