ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2026
"HER2-Low" and the Challenge of Repurposing Legacy HER2 IHC Biomarker Assays.
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Residual disease in HER2-positive early breast cancer: are we escalating the RIGHT patients to T-DM1 or T-DXd?Translational cancer research · 2026Article
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
In September 2022, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) expanded approval of the legacy Roche monoclonal antibody 4B5-based immunohistochemistry (IHC) assay to identify patients with HER2-low breast cancers predicted to respond to trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd), based on findings from the DESTINY-Breast04 and DESTINY-Breast06 clinical trials. However, this repurposing of a legacy biomarker assay raises significant clinical and technical validation concerns. The legacy HER2 IHC assay was originally developed to identify tumors with HER2 overexpression (3+) resulting from gene amplification, which leads to substantially higher HER2 receptor expression than in low/ultralow expression tumors. The current application to distinguish HER2-low and HER2-ultralow tumors from truly HER2-negative tumors represents a fundamentally different biological and clinical purpose, yet the assay's analytical and clinical validation for this new purpose remains incomplete. Critical gaps include the lack of established analytical sensitivity and specificity for identifying 1+ HER2 cases, poor reproducibility of pathologist scoring at low HER2 levels, and the absence of alternative methodologies for orthogonal validation. While more sensitive quantitative approaches (such as AQUA) may detect additional low HER2 expression cases missed by conventional IHC, increased analytical sensitivity does not automatically translate to clinical utility. Furthermore, the ASCO/CAP guidelines cutoffs were developed for HER2 overexpression detection and may not be the best choice for HER2-low/ultralow identification without clinical validation and determination of fit-for-purpose analytical specifications. We examine the current challenges of repurposing legacy HER2 IHC biomarker assays for HER2-low detection, evaluating the precedent of other repurposed IHC assays (ALK, CD30, and PD-L1), and emphasizing the necessity for proper technical and clinical validation before widespread implementation. We conclude that prospective clinical trials are essential to establish clinically meaningful cutoffs and analytical specifications appropriate for patient selection in HER2-low disease.
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.