ArticleScientific reports2025
AI microscope facilitates accurate interpretation of HER2 immunohistochemical scores 0 and 1+ in invasive breast cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Breast Cancer Research: Immunological, Pathological, and Pharmacological Perspectives for Improving Patient Outcomes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Computer-Aided Drug Design Across Breast Cancer Subtypes: Methods, Applications and Translational Outlook.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate interpretation of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) immunohistochemistry (IHC) scores 0 and 1+ is crucial for treating HER2-low breast cancer patients with antibody-drug conjugates. To improve diagnostic precision, we developed models using 698 retrospectively collected HER2 IHC slides of breast cancer and tested them on an additional 501 slides reviewed by one junior and three senior pathologists. The artificial intelligence (AI)-based models included an invasive breast cancer (IBC) region segmentation model (Model I) and a nuclei detection model (Model II). Model I achieved mean intersection over union (MIoU) scores of 0.879 and 0.880 at 20× and 40× magnifications, and Model II's F1-scores were 0.866 and 0.878. The proposed AI microscope based on Models I and II achieved F1 scores of 0.878 and 0.906 and accuracies of 0.856 and 0.890 for interpreting IHC scores of 0 and 1+ at 20× and 40×, respectively, which was superior to that of a junior pathologist with an F1 score of 0.871 and an accuracy of 0.848. Additionally, the AI microscope showed high consistency with the interpretation results from the senior pathologists, reaching kappa values of 0.703 at 20× and 0.774 at 40×. This AI microscope has the potential to enhance the interpretation accuracy of HER2 IHC score in clinical settings.
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.