Tubbs, Raymond R.

Abstract Context. —Intratumoral heterogeneity of HER2 gene amplification has been well documented and represents subclonal diversity within the tumor. The reported incidence of intratumor HER2 amplification genetic heterogeneity ranges in the literature from approximately 5% to 30%. The presence of HER2 genetic heterogeneity may increase subjectivity in HER2 interpretation by the pathologist. Objectives. —To define HER2 genetic heterogeneity and to provide practice guidelines for examining and reporting breast tumors with genetic heterogeneity for improvement of HER2 testing in breast cancer. Design. —We convened an expert panel to discuss HER2 gene amplification testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Components addressed included a definition of HER2 amplification heterogeneity, practice guidelines for examination of the tissue, and reporting criteria for this analysis. Results. —Genetic heterogeneity for amplification of HER2 gene status in invasive breast cancer is defined and guidelines established for assessing and reporting HER2 results in these cases. These guidelines are additive to and expand those published in 2007 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists. Conclusion. —Standardized methods for analysis will improve the accuracy and consistency of interpretation of HER2 gene amplification status in breast cancer.

Abstract Context. —Molecular pathology is a rapidly growing area of laboratory medicine in which DNA and RNA are analyzed. The recent introduction of array technology has added another layer of complexity involving massive parallel analysis of multiple genes, transcripts, or proteins. Objective. —As molecular technologies are increasingly implemented in clinical settings, it is important to bring uniformity to the way that test results are reported. Data Sources. —The College of American Pathologists Molecular Pathology Resource Committee members summarize elements that are already common to virtually all molecular pathology reports, as set forth in the College of American Pathologists checklists used in the laboratory accreditation process. Consensus recommendations are proposed to improve report format and content, and areas of controversy are discussed. Resources are cited that promote use of proper gene nomenclature and that describe methods for reporting mutations, translocations, microsatellite instability, and other genetic alterations related to inherited disease, cancer, identity testing, microbiology, and pharmacogenetics. Conclusions. —These resources and recommendations provide a framework for composing patient reports to convey molecular test results and their clinical significance to members of the health care team.

Abstract Context. —Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is a common method used to determine HER-2 status in breast cancer. Limited information is available concerning reproducibility of FISH in determining HER-2 gene amplification. Objective. —To present proficiency testing results of FISH for HER-2 conducted by the Cytogenetics Resource Committee of the College of American Pathologists/American College of Medical Genetics. Design. —During the past 5 years, unstained sections from 9 invasive breast carcinomas were used for HER-2 FISH proficiency testing, allowing for comparison of FISH results among a large number of laboratories. Additional data were collected using an educational (ungraded) challenge and supplemental questions in the surveys. Results. —The number of laboratories participating in HER-2 FISH proficiency testing has increased steadily during the past 5 years (from 35 in 2000 to 139 in 2004). Reproducibility of test results among laboratories was excellent for breast tumors with low copy number (no HER-2 amplification) and for breast tumors with high copy number ( HER-2 amplification). However, there was considerable variation in interpretation of results for a tumor with low-level HER-2 amplification that was tested on 2 separate occasions. Responses to supplemental questions indicated that there was a need for consensus on the use of a separate equivocal/borderline interpretative category and the need for standardization of cutoff values used to define interpretative categories. Conclusions. —The College of American Pathologists proficiency survey programs provide useful information concerning the reproducibility of clinical testing for HER-2 by FISH and reflect clinical interpretation of HER-2 FISH analyses from laboratories across the country.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have reported what seem to be false-positive results using the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–approved HercepTest (Dako Corp, Carpinteria, CA) to profile Her-2/neu amplification and overproduction in breast carcinoma. False-positive status has been based on comparisons with gene copy enumeration by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and with comparisons to immunohistochemistry (IMH) results using a monoclonal antibody. However, simple overexpression by tumor cells that have normal gene copy has not been evaluated by profiling mRNA expression, ie, such cases could simply represent true-positive, transcriptionally upregulated overexpression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four hundred infiltrating ductal carcinomas of breast were evaluated by IMH using monoclonal (CB11; Ventana Medical Systems, Inc, Tucson, AZ) and polyclonal (HercepTest; Dako) antibodies after antigen retrieval (AR). A polyclonal antibody sans AR (PCA/SAR) was also used. All IMH stains were evaluated and scored according to the guidelines for the FDA-approved HercepTest. A total of 145 of 400 carcinomas were subsequently evaluated by direct and digoxigenin-labeled (Dig) FISH, and 144 of 400 were evaluated by detection of mRNA overexpression via autoradiographic RNA:RNA in situ hybridization. RESULTS: Overall HercepTest/CB11 IMH discordance was 12%. Expression of mRNA was highly concordant with FISH and DigFISH amplification and with CB11 and PCA/SAR immunohistology. IMH false-positive cases (no Her-2/neu gene amplification) occurred with both HercepTest (23%) and CB11 (17%), and the majority of false-positive results (34 of 44) were scored as 2+. All 2+ false-positive cases were mRNA-negative. Combined results of HercepTest and CB11 showed that 79% (38 of 48) of 3+ cases were Her-2/neu gene amplified, but only 17% (seven of 41) of 2+ cases had increased gene copy. CONCLUSION: Discordant HercepTest/FISH results, and to a lesser extent discordance with CB11 IMH, are most commonly false-positive results with a score of 2+. The 2+ score as defined in the guidelines for the FDA-approved HercepTest should not be used as a criterion for trastuzumab therapy unless confirmed by FISH. Determination of Her-2 gene copy number by FISH may be a more accurate and reliable method for selecting patients eligible for trastuzumab therapy.