↓ Skip to main content

Gastric HER2 Testing Study (GaTHER)

Overview of attention for article published in The American Journal of Surgical Pathology, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Gastric HER2 Testing Study (GaTHER)
Published in
The American Journal of Surgical Pathology, April 2012
DOI 10.1097/pas.0b013e318244adbb
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen B. Fox, Marian Priyanthi Kumarasinghe, Jane E. Armes, Michael Bilous, Margaret C. Cummings, Gelareh Farshid, Nicole Fitzpatrick, Glenn D. Francis, Philip I. McCloud, Wendy Raymond, Adrienne Morey

Abstract

Trastuzumab provides a survival benefit in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-amplified/overexpressed advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers (GC/GJCs). However, the optimal method for testing is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess interlaboratory agreement on HER2 scoring in GC/GJC to aid the development of a robust testing algorithm for diagnostic practice in Australia. Nine laboratories assessed the HER2 status of 100 GC/GJC tissue samples by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and in situ hybridization (ISH) [chromogenic (CISH) or silver (SISH)] using both HER2 copy number and HER2:chr17 (chromosome 17) ratio. Results were compared with reference fluorescence ISH (FISH). Interlaboratory agreement on IHC3+ scoring was good (κ=0.76), and there was good/very good agreement between IHC (positivity defined as IHC3+) and ISH when HER2 copy number was used (κ=0.72 to 0.87). Agreement on CISH/SISH scoring was good/very good when HER2 copy number was used (κ=0.68 to 0.86), and agreement between CISH/SISH and FISH using HER2 copy number was very good (κ=0.88 to 0.91). Agreement was reduced when HER2:chr17 ratio was used. The good agreement for HER2 copy number determined by bright-field ISH suggests that this is the optimal method for testing in GC/GJC cases. An IHC3+ score was strongly predictive of a positive ISH result, although agreement for all IHC scores was only moderate, suggesting that IHC triage before ISH testing would be the most cost-effective strategy. However, because of the unique features of GC/GJC samples and the difficulty of ensuring consistent HER2 staining in the community setting, it is recommended that HER2 status in advanced GC/GJC be determined by both IHC and ISH in the same laboratory.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 4%
Unknown 26 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Other 4 15%
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Master 4 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 11%
Other 6 22%
Unknown 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 70%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 15%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Unknown 2 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 April 2012.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from The American Journal of Surgical Pathology
#3,230
of 3,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,133
of 173,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The American Journal of Surgical Pathology
#28
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,522 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 173,052 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.