↓ Skip to main content

Her2 assessment using quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction reliably identifies Her2 overexpression without amplification in breast cancer cases

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Her2 assessment using quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction reliably identifies Her2 overexpression without amplification in breast cancer cases
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12967-017-1195-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabriele Zoppoli, Anna Garuti, Gabriella Cirmena, Ludovica Verdun di Cantogno, Cristina Botta, Maurizio Gallo, Domenico Ferraioli, Enrico Carminati, Paola Baccini, Monica Curto, Piero Fregatti, Edoardo Isnaldi, Michela Lia, Roberto Murialdo, Daniele Friedman, Anna Sapino, Alberto Ballestrero

Abstract

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescent-in situ hybridization (FISH) are standard methods to assess human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status in breast cancer (BC) patients. Real-time quantitative polymerase-chain-reaction (qRT-PCR) is able to detect HER2 overexpression. Here we compared FISH, IHC, quantitative PCR (qPCR), and qRT-PCR to determine the concordance rates and evaluate their relative roles in HER2 determination. We determined HER2 status in 153 BC patients, using IHC, FISH, Q-PCR and qRT-PCR. In discordant cases, we directly measured HER2 protein levels using Western blotting. The overall agreement (OA) between FISH and Q-PCR was 94.1, with a k value of 0.87. Assuming FISH as the standard reference, Q-PCR showed an 86.1% sensitivity and a 99.0% specificity with a global accuracy of 91.6%. OA between FISH and qRT-PCR was 90.8% with a k value of 0.81. Of interest, the disagreement between FISH and qRT-PCR was mostly restricted to equivocal cases. HER2 protein analysis suggested that qRT-PCR correlates better than FISH with HER2 protein levels, particularly where FISH fails to provide conclusive results. qRT-PCR may outperform FISH in identifying patients overexpressing HER2 protein. Q-PCR cannot be used for HER2 status assessment, due to its suboptimal level of agreement with FISH. Both FISH and Q-PCR may be less accurate than qRT-PCR as surrogates of HER2 protein determination.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Other 5 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Student > Master 4 9%
Researcher 4 9%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 13 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Chemistry 2 5%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 13 30%
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 04 July 2023.
All research outputs
#19,514,300
of 24,004,724 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#3,142
of 4,250 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,974
of 314,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#72
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,004,724 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 4,250 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 314,032 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.