ArticleDiagnostic pathology2025
Exploring the heterogeneity of HER2 gene status and expression in non-positive breast cancer patients: insights from immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization.
Article in Diagnostic pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Head-to-Head Comparison of Two Antibodies for HER2 Pretargeted PET Imaging via Bioorthogonal Click Chemistry.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Experimental study of [EJNMMI research · 2026Article
- Antibody-drug conjugates in cancer treatment: from molecular design to clinical implementation.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Review
- Molecular characteristics and advances in precision therapeutics for HR-positive and HER2-low breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- HER2 Heterogeneity in Breast Cancer: Biological Basis, Clinical Implications, and Therapeutic Strategies.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2026Review
- Standardizing the pathologic assessment of HER2-(ultra)low breast cancer: insights from a national Italian project.Pathologica · 2025Article
- Revolutionizing HER-2 assessment: multidimensional radiomics in breast cancer diagnosis.BMC cancer · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Breast cancer became the most prevalent malignancy among women, and HER2 expression status is critical for treatment decisions. With the emergence of ADC drugs, HER2 low-expressing patients who previously did not respond well to traditional anti-HER2 therapies may now benefit. In this study, immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) were applied to assess HER2 expression in 349 patients with HER2-non-positive breast cancer. Our analysis revealed that HER2-low tumors exhibited fewer grade III tumors (39.74% and 55.65%, respectively, P = 0.005) and higher positivity for estrogen receptor (ER, 88.89% vs. 61.74%, P < 0.001) and progesterone receptor (PR, 84.62% vs. 57.39%, P < 0.001) compared to HER2-ZERO tumors. Of the 349 cases, IHC was ultimately evaluated in 327, the antibodies demonstrated only 64.22% (95% CI: 58.76-69.42%) agreement between clone 4B5 and clone EP3. Pathologist 1, who had more extensive working experience, demonstrated higher consistency (94.19%) with the gold standard when using clone EP3, compared to Pathologist 2 (74.31%). FISH analysis revealed significant differences in HER2/CEP17 ratio and average HER2 copy numbers between HER2-ZERO and HER2-low tumors, but no clear cut-off value could be identified. Notably, HER2/CEP17 ratio mostly between 1 and 2, with HER2-ZERO tumors primarily ≤ 1.4, and average HER2 copy numbers were mostly ≥ 2 and < 4, with HER2-ZERO tumors primarily ≤ 2.5. Despite distinct clinicopathological features, FISH remains inadequate for distinguishing HER2-low from HER2-ZERO expression. Further studies are needed to improve HER2 assessment in this challenging subset of patients.
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.