| Title |
HER2 Testing and Clinical Decision Making in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma: Guideline From the College of American Pathologists, American Society for Clinical Pathology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.5858/arpa.2016-0331-cp |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Angela N Bartley, Mary Kay Washington, Christina B Ventura, Nofisat Ismaila, Carol Colasacco, Al B Benson, Alfredo Carrato, Margaret L Gulley, Dhanpat Jain, Sanjay Kakar, Helen J Mackay, Catherine Streutker, Laura Tang, Megan Troxell, Jaffer A Ajani |
| Abstract |
-ERBB2 (erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 or HER2) is currently the only biomarker established for selection of a specific therapy for patients with advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). However, there are no comprehensive guidelines for the assessment of HER2 in patients with GEA. -To establish an evidence-based guideline for HER2 testing in patients with GEA, to formalize the algorithms for methods to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing while addressing which patients and tumor specimens are appropriate, and to provide guidance on clinical decision making. -The College of American Pathologists, American Society for Clinical Pathology, and American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an expert panel to conduct a systematic review of the literature to develop an evidence-based guideline with recommendations for optimal HER2 testing in patients with GEA. -The panel is proposing 11 recommendations with strong agreement from the open-comment participants. -The panel recommends that tumor specimen(s) from all patients with advanced GEA, who are candidates for HER2-targeted therapy, should be assessed for HER2 status before the initiation of HER2-targeted therapy. Clinicians should offer combination chemotherapy and a HER2-targeted agent as initial therapy for all patients with HER2-positive advanced GEA. For pathologists, guidance is provided for morphologic selection of neoplastic tissue, testing algorithms, scoring methods, interpretation and reporting of results, and laboratory quality assurance. -This guideline provides specific recommendations for assessment of HER2 in patients with advanced GEA while addressing pertinent technical issues and clinical implications of the results. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 113 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 31 | 27% |
| Spain | 11 | 10% |
| India | 6 | 5% |
| France | 4 | 4% |
| Brazil | 3 | 3% |
| Kenya | 3 | 3% |
| Australia | 2 | 2% |
| Turkey | 2 | 2% |
| Colombia | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 19 | 17% |
| Unknown | 30 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 72 | 64% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 18 | 16% |
| Scientists | 18 | 16% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 92 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 19 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 13% |
| Researcher | 11 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 17% |
| Unknown | 24 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 42% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 9% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 5% |
| Unknown | 27 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 578. 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 23 November 2023.
All research outputs
#41,437
of 25,827,956 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine
#3
of 2,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#795
of 314,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine
#1
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,827,956 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,770 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
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 314,446 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.