Jenkins, Robert B.

4071 Background: Selection of patients for HER2-targeted therapy is based on HER2 analysis in primary EACs. Since EACs metastasize via regional lymph nodes, concordance of HER2 gene amplification results between primary tumors and their metastatic lymph nodes (MLN) is a clinically important issue. Methods: Resected EACs (N = 103) having at least three distinct regional MLNs (total 508 MLNs; median 4 [range 3-11]) were sectioned using routine procedures and tested for HER2 amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Primary tumors were also evaluated for HER2 protein expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and by FISH. Amplification was defined as HER2/CEP17 ≥ 2. IHC was scored as 0, 1+, 2+, or 3+. Primaries whose HER2 status was positive by both FISH and IHC (ie, amplified and IHC3+), or negative by both (ie, nonamplified and IHC0-1+), were selected. HER2 status was compared between primaries and their MLNs (kappa). Results: Concordant HER2 results between primaries and their MLNs were found in 92% (95/103) of EACs (Table; κ = .76 [95% CI .60 - .92]). However, among patients with HER2-positive primaries, 19% (4/21) had HER2-nonamplified MLNs; among these cases, either all MLNs were HER2-nonamplified (n = 2), or both HER2-nonamplified and –amplified MLNs were present (n = 2). Among HER2-negative primary EACs, 5% (4/82) of cases had MLNs that were all HER2-amplified (n = 3) or both HER2-nonamplified and -amplified (n = 1). Conclusions: A patient subset whose primary EACs were HER2-positive (by both FISH and IHC) were unexpectedly found to lack HER2 amplification in corresponding MLNs. Conversely, a subgroup with HER2-negative primaries had HER2-amplified MLNs, and would have been deemed ineligible for HER2-targeted therapy. These preliminary data suggest that evaluating MLNs in resected EACs has the potential to better identify patients who benefit from HER2-targeted therapy. [Table: see text]

2 Background: Testing for HER2 in EAC has become routine given its ability to predict benefit from HER2-targeted therapy. HER2 protein analysis by immunohistochemistry (IHC) is more rapid and generally less expensive than assessment of gene amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). However, the accuracy of IHC for predicting HER2 amplification has not been examined in a large EAC cohort. Methods: Surgical EAC specimens were examined from 675 patients who underwent curative resection at a single institution without preoperative therapy. Tumors were located in the esophagus (47%) or gastroesophageal junction (53%); most were node-positive (73%). Every tumor was evaluated by IHC in parallel with FISH in a blinded manner using FDA-approved assays. A consensus IHC score was determined by 2 pathologists using tumor-specific criteria (negative, 0 or 1+; equivocal, 2+; positive, 3+). Gene amplification by FISH was defined as a HER2/CEP17ratio ≥ 2. Results: HER2 amplification was detected in 89% of IHC 3+ cases, 13% of IHC 2+ cases, and 4% of IHC 0-1+ cases (Table). Accordingly, using FISH as the reference standard, the positive predictive value (PPV) of a positive IHC test (3+) was 89% (79/89 [95% CI 82%-95%]), and the negative predictive value of a negative IHC test (0-1+) was 96% (401/417 [94%-98%]). Importantly, the PPV of an equivocal IHC score (2+) for detecting HER2 amplification was 13% (22/169 [8%-18%]). Conclusions: In the largest study to date comparing HER2 testing methods in EAC, a negative IHC result (0 or 1+) nearly excludes the presence of gene amplification by FISH. Whereas a positive IHC result (3+) strongly predicts for the presence of amplification, an equivocal IHC result (2+) is a weak predictor. These findings in EAC support a HER2 testing algorithm where IHC is used for initial screening and FISH testing is restricted to cases with equivocal IHC results. [Table: see text]