ArticleJournal of pathology and translational medicine2026
HER2-low and ultralow breast cancer: interobserver challenges and lessons from a consensus study.
Article in Journal of pathology and translational medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundThe recent approval of trastuzumab deruxtecan for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-low and HER2-ultralow breast cancer mandates an adequate assessment of these categories.
methodsSeven breast pathologists from the Breast Pathology Study Group of the Korean Society of Pathologists held an on-site expert consensus meeting. Fifteen sets of virtual whole slide images (WSI) of hematoxylin and eosin stain and HER2 immunohistochemistry were provided. The pathologists were given 60 minutes to submit their diagnosis of HER2 expression into null, ultralow, 1+, 2+, or 3+. Afterwards, in-depth discussion and consensus diagnoses were made by real-time visualization of the WSI.
resultsAfter the consensus meeting, unanimous 100% agreements were seen only in five (33.3%) of the examined cases, which consisted of three 1+ cases and two 2+ cases. Two cases (13.3%) had mild disagreement, with only one pathologist's disagreement. Of note, eight cases (53.3%) showed significant disagreement, defined by more than two pathologists' disagreement. All HER2-null cases were reclassified as ultralow after consensus review, suggesting potential widespread underclassification of ultralow cases in clinical practice.
conclusionsExperts had significant discrepancies in interpreting HER2-low/ultralow status. It is important to assess if the distinction between HER2-low and ultralow is strictly required and if HER2-null breast cancer exists in reality.
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.