The reliability of HER2-status determination from core-needle-biopsies and surgical specimens: A comparison of two established test methods (IHC, CISH)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e22141-e22141
Author(s):  
V. Wolf ◽  
R. Groβe ◽  
J. Erggelet ◽  
H. J. Holzhausen ◽  
S. Hauptmann ◽  
...  

e22141 Background: A milestone of breast-cancer therapy was the discovery of HER-2 entailing special targeted therapy with improved prognosis. The HER-2-status is routinely assessed through immunohistochemistry (IHC; HercepTest) showing protein over-expression and is double-checked with in-situ-hybridisation (ISH) demonstrating gene amplification in equivocal cases. It is questioned whether these methods achieve identical results in core-needle-biopsies and in excisional tumor specimens. Methods: We performed a retrospective comparative study in order to address these questions. From 01/03–06/08 we collected the HercepTest results from both core-needle-biopsy and surgical specimen of 109 breast cancer patients in our institute and compared these to newly evaluated chromogenic ISH (CISH) results for both specimen types in order to assess the reliability of HER-2- diagnosis of both methodological approaches and of specimen type. Results: We found no significant difference in the HER- 2-status determined from either needle-biopsies or surgical specimens irrespective of the test used. For the overall comparison (218 specimens) of HercepTest and CISH we found only slight, non-significant deviations. Four cases were CISH-negative in spite of HercepTest scoring of 3+. Vice versa, five out of the total of 38 (17.4%) CISH-positives did not correspond to the HercepTest results of 0 or 1+. Conclusions: Though not significant, there is some inconsistency in the HER-2-determination depending on the test-method, leaving these cases equivocal. In accordance with the literature, we therefore recommend to at least double-check samples with 2+ in the HercepTest as it is the current standard. Our data support the use of core-needle-biopsy as a reliable tissue sample for HER-2-diagnosis. [Table: see text]

2017 ◽  
Vol 142 (3) ◽  
pp. 364-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soomin Ahn ◽  
Junghye Lee ◽  
Min-Sun Cho ◽  
Sanghui Park ◽  
Sun Hee Sung

Context.— The Ki-67 index is strongly prognostic and is used as a surrogate marker to distinguish luminal A from luminal B breast cancer types. Objective.— To investigate differences in Ki-67 index between core needle biopsy samples and matched surgical samples in breast cancer. Design.— We included patients with invasive breast cancer who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A total of 89 pairs of core needle biopsies and surgical specimens were collected, and the Ki-67 index was assessed in hot spot areas using an image analyzer. We applied a 14% Ki-67 index to define low versus high groups. Results.— The Ki-67 index was significantly higher in core needle biopsies than in surgical specimens (P < .001), with a median absolute difference of 3.5%. When we applied 14% as a cutoff, 16 of 89 cases (18%) showed discrepancy. Thirteen cases showed a high Ki-67 index in core needle biopsies but a low Ki-67 index in surgical samples. There were 10 cases (11.2%) that showed discordant luminal A/B types between core needle biopsy and the matched surgical specimen. The reasons for the discordance were poor staining of MIB1 accompanied by fixation issues and intratumoral heterogeneity of the Ki-67 index. Conclusions.— A significant difference in the Ki-67 index between core biopsy and surgical specimens was observed. Our findings indicate that it may be better to perform the Ki-67 assay on the core needle biopsy and the surgical specimen than on only one sample.


2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 931-937 ◽  
Author(s):  
T.J.A. Dekker ◽  
V.T.H.B.M. Smit ◽  
G.K.J. Hooijer ◽  
M.J. Van de Vijver ◽  
W.E. Mesker ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document