Updated Recommendations from the Canadian National Consensus Meeting on HER2/neu Testing in Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Testing for HER2/neu in breast cancer at the time of primary diagnosis is now the standard of care. Accurate and standardized testing methods are of prime importance to ensure the proper classification of the patient's HER2/neu status. A meeting of pathologists from across Canada was convened to update the Canadian HER2/neu testing guidelines. This National HER2/neu Testing Committee reviewed the recently published American Society of Clinical Oncology/ College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) guidelines for HER2/neu testing in breast cancer. The updated Canadian HER2/neu testing guidelines are based primarily on the ASCO/CAP guidelines, with some modifications. It is anticipated that widespread adoption of these guidelines will further improve the accuracy of HER2/neu testing in Canada.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".