ArticleScientific reports2026
Quantitative immunohistochemistry and the use of cellular calibrators for HER2 receptor number determination.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is suggested that high error rates in clinical IHC compared to other laboratory disciplines are due to a lack of traceable analytic standards with quantitative controls. Quantitative controls can be achieved by implementing calibrators into IHC workflows, but recently published approaches offer little discussion about what the ideal calibrator should look like. Here, we detail an IHC method that utilizes cellular calibrators to determine the average number of HER2 receptors in tumor cells of breast cancer tissue. Electrochemiluminescent immunoassay and flow cytometry were used to establish nominal HER2 amounts in the cellular calibrators. The quantitated number of HER2 receptors and associated 4B5 scores from commercially sourced breast cancer tumors were compared. The results were discordant, indicating differences in analytical performance. Cells are ideal calibrators for IHC because the antigens they express are structurally and functionally representative of the endogenous analyte being measured. They can also be stained and analyzed identically to tissues, and are easily cultured, expanded, and manipulated. However, novel methods for labeling cells with fixed amounts of proteins are needed. In addition, standards for validation of quantitative IHC methods should be developed and their clinical utility must be demonstrated.
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.