MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414138569 · doi:10.3389/fonc.2025.1631125

Influence of HER2-low and HER2-zero status on pathologic complete response and survival in triple-negative breast cancer: a meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4414138569 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yu Q, Chuanqiang Pu, Yuping Fan, Kepeng Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Oncology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplete responseBreast cancerFunctional responseMEDLINEInflammatory response

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To delve into the influence of different status of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) on the long-term survival of patients suffering from triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), as well as the pathological complete response (pCR) following neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) via meta-analysis. Methods A computer search in the Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases was executed up to January 13, 2025, to collect studies related to HER2 status in TNBC patients. The articles were screened per the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The required data were extracted. The study quality was appraised by means of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and statistical analysis was carried out utilizing Stata 15.0 software. Results 36 studies involving 54,277 patients with TNBC were included. According to the meta-analysis, the pCR rate after NAT was more notable in the HER2-zero group compared to the HER2-low group (RR = 0.90, 95%CI: 0.86-0.93, P < 0.001). Regarding overall survival (OS), HER2-low patients exhibited a better prognosis (HR = 0.93, 95%CI: 0.90-0.97, P < 0.001). For disease-free survival, breast cancer-specific survival, and recurrence-free survival, HER2-low patients might experience an enhanced prognosis. However, the results did not exhibit statistically significant. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the meta-analysis results. No publication bias existed in studies on each outcome indicator. Conclusion HER2 status is essential for the prognostic assessment of TNBC patients, particularly in predicting pCR and OS outcomes. Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , identifier PROSPERO CRD-420250642369.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.062
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in OncologySame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207