Establishment of the Australian In Situ Hybridization Program for the Assessment of HER2 Amplification in Breast Cancer

2010 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 187-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gelareh Farshid ◽  
Jane E. Armes ◽  
Richard Bell ◽  
Margaret Cummings ◽  
Stephen Fox ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
In Situ Hybridization ◽  
Her2 Amplification

scholarly journals Novel markers to detect HER2 amplification in Breast cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shikha Mudgal ◽  
Arnav Kalra ◽  
Shalinee Rao ◽  
Bina Ravi ◽  
Nilotpal Chowdhury
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
In Situ Hybridization ◽  
Predictive Biomarker ◽  
Gene Expression Omnibus ◽  
Surrogate Markers ◽  
Her2 Expression ◽  
Her2 Amplification ◽  
Reflex Testing ◽  
Geo Database

Overexpression of HER2 in breast cancer is an important prognostic and predictive biomarker, assessed using immunohistochemistry (IHC) and in situ hybridization (ISH). More than 20% of tumours are graded equivocal on IHC and is send for reflex testing via ISH. In situ hybridization (ISH) is an expensive assay and is not available widely in resource limiting areas. Therefore, we propose that genes found significantly co-expressed with HER2 in breast cancer can be used as surrogate markers for HER2 in breast cancer which can detect HER2 positivity on IHC itself. This hypothesis is based on analysis of publicly available datasets from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database. The genes found most significantly correlated with HER2 expression were PGAP3 (r = 0.85), GRB7 (r = 0.82), STARD3 (r = 0.78), CDK12 (r= 0.68), PSMD3 (r= 0.67) and GSDMB (r = 0.63). We hypothesize that these identified surrogate markers for HER2 amplification which can be detected on IHC can detect HER2 amplification status in HER2 equivocal tumors based on IHC staining alone and will reduce the number of HER2 2+ (equivocal) category tumours.

scholarly journals Assessing HER2 amplification in breast cancer: findings from the Australian In Situ Hybridization Program

2012 ◽  
Vol 134 (2) ◽  
pp. 617-624 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Bilous ◽  
Adrienne L. Morey ◽  
Jane E. Armes ◽  
Richard Bell ◽  
Peter H. Button ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
In Situ Hybridization ◽  
Her2 Amplification

scholarly journals Detection of HER2 Amplification in Breast Carcinomas: Comparison of Multiplex Ligation-Dependent Probe Amplification (MLPA) and Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH) combined with Automated Spot Counting

2006 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 151-159
Author(s):  
Elna Moerland ◽  
Rens L. H. P. M. van Hezik ◽  
Toine C. J. M. van der Aa ◽  
Mike W. P. M. van Beek ◽  
Adriaan J. C. van den Brule
Keyword(s):  
In Situ Hybridization ◽  
Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization ◽  
Gene Amplification ◽  
Her2 Status ◽  
Her2 Amplification ◽  
Breast Carcinomas ◽  
Her2 Gene ◽  
Her2 Gene Amplification ◽  
Dependent Probe

In this study the detection of HER2 gene amplification was evaluated using Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH; PathVysion) in comparison with Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification (MLPA), a PCR based technique. These two methods were evaluated on a series of 46 formalin fixed paraffin embedded breast carcinomas, previously tested for protein overexpression by HercepTest (grouped into Hercep 1+, 2+ and 3+). HER2 gene amplification (ratio ≥ 2.0) by FISH was found in 9/10, 10/30 and 0/6 in IHC 3+, 2+ and 1+/0 cases, respectively. Digitalized automated spot counting performed with recently developed CW4000 CytoFISH software was 100% concordant with manual FISH scoring. Using MLPA 18/46 samples showed a clear HER2 amplification. Comparing MLPA and IHC showed the same results as for FISH and IHC. All but one FISH positive cases (18/19) were confirmed by MLPA for the presence of the gene amplification. The overall concordance of detection of Her2 gene amplification by FISH and MLPA was 98% (45/46). Furthermore, both the level of amplification and equivocal results correlated well between both methods. In conclusion, MLPA is a reliable and reproducible technique and can be used as an either alternative or additional test to determine HER2 status in breast carcinomas.

scholarly journals Evaluating HER2 Gene Amplification Using Chromogenic In Situ Hybridization (CISH) Method In Comparison To Immunohistochemistry Method in Breast Carcinoma

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. 1977-1981 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hadi Atabati ◽  
Amir Raoofi ◽  
Abdollah Amini ◽  
Reza Masteri Farahani
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
In Situ Hybridization ◽  
Gene Amplification ◽  
Method Comparison ◽  
Her2 Expression ◽  
Her2 Gene ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Chromogenic In Situ Hybridization

BACKGROUND: In patients with breast cancer, HER2 gene expression is of a great importance in reacting to Herceptin treatment. To evaluate this event, immunohistochemistry (IHC) has been done routinely on the basis of scoring it and so the patients were divided into 4 groups. Lately, as there have been disagreements about how to treat score 2 patients, chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH) and florescence in situ hybridization (FISH) are introduced. Since CISH method is more convenient than FISH for gene amplification study, FISH has been substituted by CISH. AIM: The current study is conducted in order to investigate whether using CISH is a better method comparison to IHC method for determines HER2 expression in patients with breast cancer in. METHODS: In this cross-sectional descriptive analytical study, information of 44 female patients with invasive ductal breast cancer were gathered from Imam Reza and Omid Hospital in Mashhad. IHC staining was done for all patients in order to determine the level of HER2 expression, and after scoring them into 4 groups of 0, +1, +2 and +3, CISH staining was carried out for all 4 groups. At the end, results from both methods were statistically evaluated using SPSS software V.22.0. RESULTS: The average age of patients was 50.2 with the standard deviation of 10.96. Using IHC method was observed that 2.6% (1 patient), 26.3% (10 patients), 65.8% (25 patients) and 5.3% (2 patients) percentage of patients had scores of 0, +1, +2 and +3. On the other hand, CISH method showed 36 patients (90%) with no amplifications and 4 (10%) with sever amplifications. In a comparative study using Fisher's exact test (p = 0.000), we found a significant relation between IHC method and CISH method indicating that all patients showing severe amplifications in CISH method, owned scores of +2 and +3 in IHC method. CONCLUSION: According to the present study and comparing the results with similar previous studies, it can be concluded that CISH method works highly effective in determining HER2 expression level in patients with breast cancer. This method is also able to determine the status of patients with score +2 in IHC for their treatment with herceptin

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document