Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40050230›Full record

ArticleThe journal of pathology. Clinical research2025

Enhancing HER2 testing in breast cancer: predicting fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) scores from immunohistochemistry images via deep learning.

Daniel O Macaulay, Wenchao Han, Mark D Zarella, Chris A Garcia, Thomas E Tavolara

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of pathology. Clinical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Daniel O MacaulayDivision of Computational Pathology and AI, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0009-0006-2181-9084
Wenchao HanDivision of Computational Pathology and AI, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Mark D ZarellaDivision of Computational Pathology and AI, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Chris A GarciaDivision of Computational Pathology and AI, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Thomas E TavolaraDivision of Computational Pathology and AI, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer affects millions globally, necessitating precise biomarker testing for effective treatment. HER2 testing is crucial for guiding therapy, particularly with novel antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) like trastuzumab deruxtecan, which shows promise for breast cancers with low HER2 expression. Current HER2 testing methods, including immunohistochemistry (IHC) and in situ hybridization (ISH), have limitations. IHC, a semi-quantitative assay, is prone to interobserver variability. While ISH provides higher precision than IHC, it remains more resource-intensive in terms of cost and workflow. However, turnaround time is typically faster than that of other advanced molecular methods such as next-generation sequencing. We adapted the clustering-constrained-attention multiple-instance deep learning model to improve IHC testing and reduce dependence on reflex fluorescence ISH (FISH) tests. Using 5,731 HER2 IHC images, including 592 cases with FISH testing, we trained two models: one for predicting HER2 scores from IHC images and another for predicting FISH scores from equivocal cases. The HER2 IHC score prediction model achieved 91% ± 0.01 overall accuracy and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) of 0.98 ± 0.01. The FISH score prediction model had an ROC AUC of 0.84 ± 0.07, with sensitivity at 0.37 ± 0.13 and specificity at 0.96 ± 0.03. External validation on cases from 203 institutions showed similar performance. The HER2 IHC model maintained a 91% ± 0.01 accuracy and an ROC AUC of 0.98 ± 0.01, while the FISH model had an ROC AUC of 0.75 ± 0.03, with sensitivity at 0.28 ± 0.04 and specificity at 0.93 ± 0.01. Our model advances HER2 scoring by reducing subjectivity and variability in current scoring methods. Despite lower accuracy and sensitivity in the FISH prediction model, it may be a beneficial option for settings where reflex FISH testing is unavailable or prohibitive. With high specificity, our model can serve as an effective screening tool, enhancing breast cancer diagnosis and treatment selection.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsDeep LearningErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesImmunohistochemistryIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceFemaleHumansPredictive Value of TestsBiomarkers, TumorERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine Kinasesbiomarkersbreast cancerdeep learningfluorescenceHER2immunohistochemistryin situ hybridization

Identifiers

PMID40050230
PMCPMC11884934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.