ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2026
HER2 testing in multiple solid tumor types: concordance of immunohistochemistry scores between three HER2 scoring algorithms.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04482309 (A Phase 2, Multicenter, Open-label Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Trastuzumab Deruxtecan), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
A Phase 2, Multicenter, Open-label Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Trastuzumab Deruxtecan (T-DXd, DS-8201a) for the Treatment of Selected HER2 Expressing Tumors (DESTINY-PanTumor02)
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trastuzumab deruxtecan in HER2-expressing gynecologic cancers from DESTINY-PanTumor02: antitumor activity, safety, and exploratory biomarker analyses.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2026Trial
- HER2 Alterations in Squamous Cell Lung Cancer: Biology, Therapeutic Landscape, and Emerging Precision Approaches.Cancers · 2026Review
- Antibody-drug conjugates and beyond in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: A comprehensive review of emergent strategies.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) immunohistochemistry (IHC) scoring is crucial to identify patients for HER2-directed therapy; however, validated HER2 scoring guidelines are lacking for non-breast/gastric solid tumors. We investigated concordance in IHC scores from independent pathologists using three different scoring algorithms in non-gastric/breast solid tumors. Whole-slide scans of HER2-stained tumor samples from DESTINY-PanTumor02 (NCT04482309) and a commercial pan-tumor sample set were scored by three independent, board-certified pathologists using American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) scoring algorithms for gastric (reference) and breast cancers, and a clinical trial-based algorithm for endometrial cancers (evaluated for endometrial tumors only). The pathologists evaluated 488 samples from multiple solid tumor types. Mean positive percentage agreement (PPA; across pathologists) between the breast and gastric algorithms was higher for samples scored as IHC 3 + or IHC 0 compared with IHC 2 + or IHC 1 + . Inter-pathologist PPA for each algorithm was greatest in samples scored as IHC 3 + and IHC 0. The majority of inter-pathologist pairwise comparisons had Cohen's κ coefficient values > 0.4 when using the gastric or breast algorithm to determine IHC scores, indicating at least moderate agreement between pathologists; Cohen's κ coefficient values were generally lower (range 0.17-0.43) for the endometrial algorithm. ASCO/CAP scoring algorithms for gastric and breast cancer were comparable for identifying HER2 IHC 3 + tumors; lower concordance was observed for IHC 2 + /1 + tumors. These findings highlight a real-world issue of inter-pathologist variability and emphasize a need for greater awareness of best scoring practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41670705What 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.