HER-2 testing in breast cancer using parallel tissue-based methods
- PMID: 15113815
- DOI: 10.1001/jama.291.16.1972
HER-2 testing in breast cancer using parallel tissue-based methods
Abstract
Context: Testing for HER-2 oncogene in breast cancer has increased because of its role as a prognostic and predictive factor. Some advocate gene testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) vs protein testing by immunohistochemistry as the method which most accurately evaluates and predicts response to the anti-HER-2 antibody, trastuzumab. However, critical examination of FISH on a screening basis has yet to be performed.
Objectives: To determine the correlation between FISH and immunohistochemistry results by determining HER-2/neu gene status on tumor sections with indeterminate immunohistochemistry results (2+ score), confirm gene amplification on tumor sections with positive results (3+ score), and verify gene status on tumor sections with negative results (0 or 1+ score).
Design, setting, and patients: A quality control and quality assurance program for HER-2 testing by FISH, which used tumor specimens from 2963 patients (median age, 56 years) with breast cancer received from 135 hospitals and cancer centers in 29 states, was performed at a reference laboratory from January 1, 1999, to May 15, 2003. Every specimen evaluated by FISH was parallel tested with immunohistochemistry tests.
Main outcome measures: With FISH as the presumed standard testing method, the positive and negative predictive values and sensitivity and specificity of immunohistochemistry were calculated.
Results: A total of 3260 clinical HER-2 tests by FISH were performed on 2963 serially referred breast cancer specimens. Of these, 2933 tests were successful and 2913 breast cancer specimens had both FISH and immunohistochemistry results available. With FISH as the standard testing method, the positive predictive value of positive immunohistochemistry score (3+) was 91.6%, and the negative predictive value of negative immunohistochemistry score (0 or 1+) was 97.2%. The sensitivity of immunohistochemistry tests, including tumor sections with scores of 2+ or 3+, was 92.6% and the specificity of immunohistochemistry tests with scores of 3+ was 98.8%. The FISH test had a significantly higher failure rate (5% vs 0.08%) and reagent cost (140 dollars vs 10 dollars), and longer testing (36 hours vs 4 hours) and interpretation times (7 minutes vs 45 seconds) vs immunohistochemistry tests.
Conclusions: A testing algorithm for HER-2 determination is most efficient by using immunohistochemistry as the method of choice, with FISH performed for cancers with indeterminate results (2+ score). Successful quality control and quality assurance programs are a prerequisite for such approaches.
Comment in
-
High-quality HER-2 testing: setting a standard for oncologic biomarker assessment.JAMA. 2004 Apr 28;291(16):2019-20. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.16.2019. JAMA. 2004. PMID: 15113823 No abstract available.
-
HER-2 and fluorescent in situ hybridization to evaluate breast cancer.JAMA. 2004 Jul 21;292(3):328; author reply 328-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.292.3.328-a. JAMA. 2004. PMID: 15265845 No abstract available.
-
HER-2 testing in breast cancer.JAMA. 2004 Oct 20;292(15):1817-8; author reply 1818. doi: 10.1001/jama.292.15.1817-b. JAMA. 2004. PMID: 15494577 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Evaluation of HER-2 status in breast carcinoma by fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry.Breast Cancer. 2003;10(3):234-40. doi: 10.1007/BF02966723. Breast Cancer. 2003. PMID: 12955036
-
HER-2/neu in breast cancer: interobserver variability and performance of immunohistochemistry with 4 antibodies compared with fluorescent in situ hybridization.Mod Pathol. 2001 Nov;14(11):1079-86. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.3880440. Mod Pathol. 2001. PMID: 11706067
-
Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 expression in early breast cancer patients: a Swiss cost-effectiveness analysis of different predictive assay strategies.Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010 Nov;124(2):497-507. doi: 10.1007/s10549-010-0862-7. Epub 2010 Apr 3. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010. PMID: 20364309
-
HER2 testing in breast cancer: NCCN Task Force report and recommendations.J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2006 Jul;4 Suppl 3:S1-22; quiz S23-4. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2006. PMID: 16813731 Review.
-
Hidden HER-2/neu-positive breast cancer: how to maximize detection.IDrugs. 2009 Apr;12(4):238-42. IDrugs. 2009. PMID: 19350468 Review.
Cited by
-
Mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor amplification correlates with adverse pathological features and poor clinical outcome in colorectal cancer.World J Gastrointest Surg. 2024 May 27;16(5):1395-1406. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v16.i5.1395. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2024. PMID: 38817281 Free PMC article.
-
Concordance between cryobiopsy and forceps biopsy specimens in assessment of immunohistochemistry staining for non-small cell lung carcinoma.Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2023 Jun 30;12(6):1245-1255. doi: 10.21037/tlcr-22-621. Epub 2023 Jun 13. Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2023. PMID: 37425419 Free PMC article.
-
HER2 Low Breast Cancer: A New Subtype or a Trojan for Cytotoxic Drug Delivery?Int J Mol Sci. 2023 May 4;24(9):8206. doi: 10.3390/ijms24098206. Int J Mol Sci. 2023. PMID: 37175916 Free PMC article. Review.
-
ChromLoops: a comprehensive database for specific protein-mediated chromatin loops in diverse organisms.Nucleic Acids Res. 2023 Jan 6;51(D1):D57-D69. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkac893. Nucleic Acids Res. 2023. PMID: 36243984 Free PMC article.
-
Singular Nuclei Segmentation for Automatic HER2 Quantification Using CISH Whole Slide Images.Sensors (Basel). 2022 Sep 28;22(19):7361. doi: 10.3390/s22197361. Sensors (Basel). 2022. PMID: 36236459 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous