ArticleiScience2026
Multi-institutional assessment of HER2 immunohistochemistry in gastric and esophagogastric junction cancer.
Article in iScience, 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
27 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The reliability of the traditional HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) scoring system for classifying low-expression cases remains uncertain, creating a barrier to effectively deploying new antibody-drug conjugates. To assess inter-observer agreement, 15 pathologists independently scored HER2 IHC in 460 gastric cancer specimens. We found the highest overall percent agreement (OPA) for HER2 3+ scores (0.17). The OPA for HER2 IHC 2+ cases was 0.11. However, consensus could not be reached for specimens scored as 0 or 1+. These findings suggest that conventional HER2 IHC scoring is relatively reliable for identifying patients with high HER2 expression but reveals significant inconsistency in classifying HER2-low versus HER2-zero cases. This highlights a critical limitation of the current system for guiding modern therapies and underscores the necessity for revised, precise scoring methodologies.
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.