Indian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology
Home About us Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Ahead Of Print Login 
Users Online: 1267
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
IJPM is coming out with a Special issue on "Genitourinary & Gynecological pathology including Breast". Please submit your articles for these issues


 
  Table of Contents    
ORIGINAL ARTICLE  
Year : 2011  |  Volume : 54  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 532-538
Assessment of HER2/Neu status by fluorescence in situ hybridization in immunohistochemistry-equivocal cases of invasive ductal carcinoma and aberrant signal patterns: A study at a tertiary cancer center


1 Department of Laboratory Medicine (Pathology and Molecular Diagnostics), Basavatarakam Indo-American Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, Hyderabad, India
2 Department of Medical Oncology, Basavatarakam Indo-American Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, Hyderabad, India

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Web Publication20-Sep-2011
 

   Abstract 

Introduction: HER-2/neu status determines the eligibility for targeted therapy with trastuzumab in breast carcinoma. Evaluation for HER-2/neu protein expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and gene amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) has become the gold standard. Aims: Since data on HER-2/neu assessment by IHC and FISH and studies regarding concordance between the results of the two techniques are limited, especially from India, we sought to study HER-2 gene amplification status by FISH in equivocal (2+) cases by IHC and also study aberrant signal patterns. Settings and Design: Mastectomies and breast core biopsies, equivocal for HER-2/neu protein expression, were analyzed for HER-2 amplification by FISH. Materials and Methods: IHC (DAKO) and FISH (PathVysion dual-probe system) tests were performed on 68 of 112 (after exclusion) 10% neutral buffered formalin (NBF)-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues and evaluated according to American Society of Clinical Oncology ASCO guidelines. Statistical Analysis Used: Chi-square (χ2 ) test and the two-tailed P value were applied using Graphpad Quickcels software, version 2006. Results: It was found that 73.5% of the IHC 2+ patients were negative for HER-2/neu amplification, 25% were positive (ratios ranging from 2.3 to 5.6) and 1 patient was equivocal (2.2). Retesting FISH HER-2 equivocal case on another tumor block by IHC demonstrated HER-2 overexpression of protein 3+, thus resolving the equivocal status. Polysomy and HER-2 genetic heterogeneity were seen frequently. Conclusions: The findings reiterate that IHC HER-2 equivocal cases are a heterogenous group and need FISH for further categorization. Low concurrence (25%) rate between both IHC and FISH results in the equivocal scenario can be attributed to tumors with polysomy 17 and HER-2/neu genetic heterogeneity.

Keywords: Breast cancer, FISH, HER-2/neu, invasive ductal carcinomas, unusual signal patterns

How to cite this article:
Murthy SS, Sandhya D G, Ahmed F, Goud K I, Dayal M, Suseela K, Rajappa SJ. Assessment of HER2/Neu status by fluorescence in situ hybridization in immunohistochemistry-equivocal cases of invasive ductal carcinoma and aberrant signal patterns: A study at a tertiary cancer center. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 2011;54:532-8

How to cite this URL:
Murthy SS, Sandhya D G, Ahmed F, Goud K I, Dayal M, Suseela K, Rajappa SJ. Assessment of HER2/Neu status by fluorescence in situ hybridization in immunohistochemistry-equivocal cases of invasive ductal carcinoma and aberrant signal patterns: A study at a tertiary cancer center. Indian J Pathol Microbiol [serial online] 2011 [cited 2019 Jun 18];54:532-8. Available from: http://www.ijpmonline.org/text.asp?2011/54/3/532/85087



   Introduction Top


HER-2/neu amplification is the key to eligibility for trastuzumab therapy, prognosis and predictive response in breast carcinomas. [1],[2],[3],[4],[5],[6],[7],[8],[9] American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American pathologists (ASCO/CAP) guidelines recommend HER-2/neu testing in invasive component of breast tumor primarily by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and when equivocal (2+) or borderline, the same needs to be assessed by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). [10],[11],[12],[13],[14],[15] A high rate of discordance between both assays has been reported, with 40% of the patients positive for protein expression by IHC would be FISH negative, while 16% FISH-positive patients would be IHC negative. [16] The role of HER-2 genetic heterogeneity and polysomy 17, copy number anomaly, in contributing to the discordance is controversial. To the best of our knowledge, data on HER-2 status by FISH from India is limited. Hence HER-2 gene status in all IHC-equivocal cases by FISH, as well as concordance rates between the results of the two assays, was determined, and interpretation of copy number anomalies is discussed herein.


   Materials and Methods Top


A total of 112 specimens of mastectomies and breast core biopsies, equivocal for HER-2/neu protein expression, referred during the period August 2008 to December 2009, were assessed for HER-2 amplification by FISH. Excluding all duct carcinoma in situ (DCIS) cases, review of slides and blocks from other referral centers (with debatable pre-analytic issues like fixation of tissues), post-chemotherapy cases and the cases with incomplete information about the patient, only 60.71% (68/112) of the patients could be included in the study. Further, a patient rendered equivocal for protein expression and gene amplification was reassessed by IHC on another paraffin block with different area of tumor. Although as a routine, IHC HER-2, 3+/1+ patients are not evaluated for gene amplification by FISH owing to the test being expensive, 7 IHC HER-2/neu 3+ cases and one 1+ case were evaluated for comparison. Approval of the institutional ethical committee was obtained, and patients were included in the study after obtaining their informed consent. Clinical and pathological information was collected. The tumors were graded according to the modified Scarff-Bloom-Richardson histological grading. [17] IHC and FISH assays were conducted blinded from clinical information.

Immunohistochemical Staining for HER-2/neu Protein Expression


Sections with thickness of 3-4 m each were obtained from 10% neutral buffer formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor tissues. The tissue sections were deparaffinized in xylene and dehydrated using alcohol. After rehydration with water, retrieval of antigen was achieved by micro-waving the sections in citrate buffer (pH, 6.0) at 100°C for 3 cycles (each cycle, 5 minutes) for HER-2/neu immunostaining. After blocking the endogenous peroxidase activity with 0.3% hydrogen peroxide for 5 to 10 minutes, the sections were stained for HER-2/neu using polyclonal anti-rabbit cerb-B2 antibody according to instructions of the manufacturer and using reagents included in cerb-B2 detection kit (DAKO). The excess antibody was washed away with TRIS wash buffer (pH, 7.5-7.6). The tissue was incubated with EnVision TM Peroxidase/DAB, Rabbit/Mouse detection system (DAKO) for half an hour. Excess antibody was washed away with TRIS wash buffer again. Peroxidase was demonstrated with 0.5% diamino-benzidine for 5 minutes, and the sections were counterstained with Gills hematoxylin. Positive and negative controls were performed at the same time for each section. Positive HER-2/neu staining was identified in the form of membrane staining. Scoring for HER-2 was based on the percentage of cells stained, as well as intensity of membrane staining. HER-2/neu membrane staining in tumor cells was scored from 0 to 3 according to ASCO guidelines. [18] The biopsy sections were scored 0, 1+, 2+ and 3+. Score of 0 and 1+ was considered negative for HER-2 protein expression. while 2+ score, (equivocal/borderline) was defined as complete membrane staining that is nonuniform or weak in less than 30% of tumor cells. A 3+ score indicated protein expression.

FISH Assay

FISH allows rapid visual and accurate cell-by-cell assessment of the level of gene amplification with information about distribution of gene copies in each cell of the histologic section. Briefly 4-micron paraffin-embedded sections were deparaffinized using xylene and dehydrated in absolute ethanol for 45 minutes. The slides were pretreated chemically and enzymatically to remove proteins that blocked DNA access. Chaotropic salt treatment was given with 1 N sodium thio-cyanate for 30 minutes at 80°C. The two probes - LSI HER-2 probe directly labeled in spectrum orange and Centromere enumerator probe (CEP) 17 labeled in spectrum green - provided in the PathVysion HER-2/neu DNA probe kit from Vysis, Inc., Downers Grove, IL, were denatured and then cohybridized with the tissue DNA. Post-hybridization washes were performed with 2XSSC/0.3% NP40 at 37°C, and slides were counterstained with DAPI. The number of hybridized orange and green signals per nucleus were scored in 50 morphologically intact and non-overlapping nuclei using a fluorescence microscope (Olympus BX41) equipped with appropriate filter set. Criteria for successful FISH analysis included identification of single-copy HER-2/neu gene status in normal cells within the specimen, uniform hybridization throughout the section, and limited DNA loss. The cutoffs for the variables were defined by objective biologically relevant thresholds. Discrimination of true HER-2/neu amplification required correction for chromosome 17 polysomy. The FISH-defined genetic variables include HER-2/neu gene copy number (signals per cell), average chromosome 17 copy number (signals per cell) and the average HER-2/neu gene-to-chromosome 17 signal ratio. The ratio was derived by the calculation of the mean of HER-2/neu amplifications relative to chromosome 17 signals. Interpretation of HER-2/neu gene amplification was based on the guidelines set by American Society of Clinical Oncology/CAP. [19] A HER-2-CEP17 ratio less than 1.8 indicated a non-amplified HER-2 gene status; a ratio in the range of 1.8-2.2 was "equivocal"; and if the ratio was greater than 2.2, then HER-2 gene status was "amplified". HER-2 genetic heterogeneity (GH) is also known to occur and influence the FISH result. If there are more than 5% or less than 50% of infiltrating tumor cells with a ratio higher than 2.2, HER-2 GH exists. If more than 50% of infiltrating tumor cells have a ratio more than 2.2, then the specimen is considered to be amplified. [20] Copy number anomalies such as polysomy 17, co-amplification of HER-2 and CEP17 signals influence the interpretation of the result. Polysomy is defined as >3 copies of chromosome 17 signals per cell. Disomy 17 is considered if copy number is in the range of 1.76-2.25 signals per cell. The range took into account that even a given tumor specimen predominantly disomy 17 could still show some deviation from average of 2 signals per cell, because of tumor's genetic instability, high mitotic index, and potential nuclear truncation through tissue sectioning. Based on the range of mean CEP17 copy number/cell, the following were defined: Hypodisomy, ≤1.75 signals per cell; polysomy, ≥2.26 signals per cell; low polysomy, 2.26-3.75 signals per cell; and high polysomy, ≥3.76 signals per cell. [21]

Statistical Analysis

To determine the association between two variables, χ2 test was applied. The two-tailed P value to test for significance between variables was calculated using Graphpad Quickcels software, version 2006.


   Results Top


Analysis of the 68 cases of invasive ductal carcinomas indicated that patients were in the age group of 22-80 years with a median of 52 years, with 70.5% of women over the age of 45 years. Grade II tumors were seen predominantly in 64.7% of the patients; and grade III, in 23.5%. Stage IIA disease was more frequent (57.3%), while stage IIB disease was less common (30.8%). Overall, hormone positivity was seen in about 61% of the patients. "ER+ PR+" status was seen in 52.9% of the patients, while "ER- PR-" status was seen in 39.7%. Lymph nodes were not involved in 61.7% of the patients. Evaluation of IHC-equivocal cases reflexed for HER-2 FISH analysis indicated that 50 out of 68 (i.e., 73.5%) 2+ patients were non-amplified for HER-2/neu gene with HER-2/CEP17 ratios ranging from 0.68 to 1.68 [Figure 1],[Figure 2],[Figure 3],[Figure 4]. FISH could not resolve the dilemma in 1 (1.5%) patient as the results were equivocal by FISH too. Retesting the same IHC and FISH HER-2/neu equivocal case on another tumor block by IHC demonstrated overexpression of HER-2 protein with a score of 3+ [Table 1].
Table 1: Data on clinical, histological, pathological and hormonal receptor status in infiltrating ductal carcinomas (n = 68) - number (%)

Click here to view
Figure 1: HER-2/neu 1+ (negative for HER-2 protein expression by immunohistochemistry), (x400 DAB)

Click here to view
Figure 2: HER-2/neu 3+ (positive for HER-2 protein expression by immunohistochemistry), (x400 DAB)

Click here to view
Figure 3: HER-2/neu gene non-amplification and polysomy 17 (FISH)

Click here to view
Figure 4: Positive for HER-2/neu amplification by FISH

Click here to view


Correlation of the frequency of pathological features such as grade, stage of the disease, tumor size, nodal status, hormone receptor status with HER-2/neu status was performed to see the possible association of these features in the IHC 2+/equivocal scenario. An increase in frequency of cases with HER-2/neu gene amplification was found to be associated only with increase in tumor size and nodal involvement, though not statistically significant. Chi-square analysis indicated significant difference between stage I and IIA diseases ( P = 0.045). Correlation between hormone receptor positivity and negativity showed the association bordering on significance ( P = 0.090) [Table 2].
Table 2: Correlation of HER-2/neu status with grade/size/lymph node status of tumors in IHC HER-2/neu equivocal cases

Click here to view


Studies on concordance between the results of the IHC and FISH assays in 3+ and 1+ categories of protein expression showed strong concordance, with 6 out of 7 cases having HER-2 gene amplification. However, 1 case of the 3+ overexpressors was non-amplified, and 73.5% of the weak overexpressors (2+) were negative for HER-2 gene amplification. Similarly a single case with IHC 1+ negative for HER-2 protein expression was also negative for gene amplification [Table 3].
Table 3: Concordance studies on HER-2 status between IHC and FISH assays (n = 76)

Click here to view


Data was also evaluated for the presence of polysomy 17 and HER-2 genetic heterogeneity, and the results are presented in [Table 4]. It was found that 78.3% of the specimens were positive for polysomy 17, and 63.8% of the specimens were non-amplified. Polysomy-negative cases were non-amplified, with low polysomy in 69.2% of cases.
Table 4: Data on polysomy 17, HER-2 genetic heterogeneity and HER-2 gene amplification from 60 IDC cases

Click here to view


Two cases presented with an aberrant signal pattern consisting of cells with clusters of CEP17 green signals overlaying the red HER-2 signals representing co-amplification of both the genes [Figure 5]. The HER-2 to CEP17 ratio, HER-2 copy number and CEP17 copy number for the first specimens were 1.07, 6.96 and 6.46, respectively; while for the second specimen, the corresponding observations were 1.12, 10.36 and 9.2.
Figure 5: Co-amplification of HER-2/neu gene and CEP17 signals

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


The biological mechanisms of breast carcinogenesis are not fully understood.

Healthy breast cells show low protein expression and contain just 2 copies of the HER-2 gene per cell. Evidences indicate that HER-2/neu gene is overexpressed and/or amplified in 25% to 30% of invasive carcinomas. [1],[13] However an Indian study revealed HER2 neu overexpression in 46.37%; [7] In approximately 90% to 95% of these cases, overexpression is the direct result of gene amplification. [13] The occurrence of FISH equivocal cases with a ratio between 1.8 and 2.2 is extremely rare. In the current study, the observations of amplification of HER-2/neu in 25% of IHC 2+ patients is in stark contrast to the findings of 66.6% of HER-2/neu amplification in IHC 2+ cases by another group in India. [22] It could possibly be due to the different antibodies available in the market for IHC HER-2 evaluation. Therefore, nationwide multicentric studies with a standard protocol should be performed for analysis to arrive at a plausible conclusion. The 2+ IHC cases may be a heterogeneous group. Further, retesting a FISH-equivocal case by IHC on another tumor block as per the recommendations of ASCO guidelines helped in re-categorizing to 3+ status with the patient being eligible for trastuzumab treatment. These findings parallel the previous reports of existence of intratumoral and intercellular HER-2 heterogeneity in breast carcinomas. [23],[24],[25]

Current management of patients of carcinoma of the breast depends on the pathology and status of prognostic markers ER, PR, HER-2/neu, etc. Tumors with HER-2/neu amplification or overexpression are known to be aggressive, often higher grade, with a high proliferation/progression rate and a propensity for lymph node involvement. Between the pathological subgroups, the percentages of equivocal or 2+ tumors turning out to be FISH positive should not be different. Correlation studies on association of grade, stage, tumor size, nodal and hormone receptor status with HER-2/neu amplification status confirmed the same. Another study showed a statistically inverse relationship between hormone receptor status and HER-2 gene status.[22]

Several studies described concordance of as high as 79% to 100% in 3+ group [14],[15] ; and 12% to 36% for 2+ cases [10] between IHC and FISH results. An Indian group described that IHC 3+ (93.9%) and IHC-negative (85.9%) cases showed good concordance with corresponding FISH results. [22] In the current study, there was good concordance in 6 out of 7 IHC 3+ cases having HER-2 gene amplification. One IHC 1+ case was negative by FISH. HER-2/neu overexpression without concurrent HER-2/neu gene amplification was described in 1% to 20% of the breast tumors, and a small undetermined percentage of breast tumors demonstrated amplification of the gene without overexpression. [10],[26] The observations of low concurrence of HER-2 amplification (25%) with protein expression indicate weak association in equivocal cases. This emphasizes the fact that dual-colored FISH is the gold standard for the accurate measurement of HER-2/neu gene amplification in IHC-equivocal breast carcinomas. [19] In practice, discordant results between the two methodologies have been reported. Protein expression for HER-2/neu both in 3+ and 2+ cases has been attributed to variations in HER-2 testing due to the use of different antibodies for immunohistochemical studies; different scoring systems; adverse effects of variable fixation, which might have a detrimental effect on IHC; polysomy of chromosome 17; [26],[27] and post-transcriptional regulation leading to increased surface receptor expression. [11],[15] However, larger number of cases need to be assessed to arrive at a plausible conclusion.

Typically, HER-2 amplification occurs in the form of homogeneously staining regions (HSRs) visible in metaphase chromosomes of tumor cells and presenting as clusters of signals in interphase nuclei after in situ hybridization. These clusters may be fragmented through further rearrangements. A difficulty in the assessment of the status of the HER-2 gene is that its copy number increase may be related not to an amplification but to one of the copy number anomalies, polysomy of chromosome 17, which presents with unusual signal pattern. [5],[16],[28] Interpretation of such cases requires a deviation from considering HER-2-CEP17 ratio (the standard rule) in order not to report an inadequate HER-2 amplification status. Evidences from literature indicate that the interpretation of unusual signal patterns should include assessment of raw data on mean copy number of signals per nuclei of both HER-2/neu and CEP17 for determining polysomy and genetic heterogeneity. [29]

Polysomy 17 refers to a cell with ≥3 copies of the chromosome 17 centromere, with parallel increase of HER-2 and CEP17 copies with random distribution of both signals within the nucleus of a tumor cell. The HER-2-CEP17 ratio may be equal to or slightly greater than 1 and leads to the wrong interpretation that the tumor is negative for amplification. If the copy number of HER 2 is greater than 6 copies per cell, then interpretation is that it is a true amplification. This allows the distinction between a polysomy 17 and true HER-2 amplification. IHC 2+ expression has been shown to be relatively common in tumors with polysomy 17 but no HER-2 amplification. Further, polysomy 17 tumors do not overexpress the HER-2 mRNA or the protein at the high level required for efficacy of the trastuzumab therapy, and consequently polysomy tumors without HER-2 amplification are considered as functionally HER-2-negative tumors. [27] Hence it is important to differentiate tumors with true HER-2 amplification from those having a copy number increase of the gene simply related to polysomy 17. Recent studies have described polysomy 17 incidence ranging from 10% to 50%, depending on which tumors are assessed and which criteria are applied. [6],[21] Polysomy 17 was commonly seen in 78% of the cases. Thirty (63.8%) out of 47 specimens were negative for HER-2 gene amplification with low polysomy mean copy number of CEP17, with <3.75 signals being more common (80%). High polysomy with mean copy number of CEP17 signals being >3.75 signals per cell was seen in 20% of specimens with mean HER-2 copy number per cell ranging from 2 to 5.28 signals per cell. HER-2 genetic heterogeneity was evident in 23.3% of specimens. Tumors with polysomy 17 and negative for HER-2 amplification represent HER-2- negative tumors.

In contrast, 17 (36%) out of 47 specimens were positive for HER- 2 amplification, with majority presenting with low polysomy. Mean HER-2 copy number ranged from 6.0 to 16.32 signals per cell, with all specimens having more than 6 copies of HER-2 per cell. HER-2 genetic heterogeneity was very common. These cases represent tumors with true HER-2 amplification.

Evidences from the literature [21] and our study indicate that in the absence of HER-2 gene amplification, high or low polysomy is inadequate to cause significant increase in gene dosage and subsequent HER-2/neu protein overexpression. Cases with high polysomy with concurrent modest gene amplification (ratio, 2-5.28) may have an additive effect on gene dosage and protein expression.

Among the polysomy-negative cases, 9 out of 13 were HER-2 non-amplified, with majority of the specimens showing disomy and mean copy number of HER-2 ranging from 1.64 to 3.46. However, HER-2 copy numbers ranged from 3.38 to 9.22 in polysomy-negative but HER-2-amplified cases.

Other copy number anomalies that presented with unusual signal patterns include co-amplification of HER-2 and CEP17 signals and deletion of CEP17 signals. [16],[30] Co-amplification of the HER-2 and CEP17 genes is rare and reported in 1% of the cases. However, the same was observed in 2 cases. When interpretation is based on copy number of HER-2 signals(ASCO guidelines) the presence of greater than 6 copies per nucleus, equates to a true HER-2 amplification. Since the copy number of HER-2 signals was 10.36 and there were greater than 6 copies of HER-2, the specimens had HER-2 gene amplification despite the HER-2 to CEP17 ratio being equal to or a little more than 1. Centromeric CEP17 and HER-2 locus are far away from each other, and normally CEP17 is not included in the HER-2 amplicon. A complex translocation between HER-2 and CEP17 locus brings the two amplicons next to each other on the same chromosome, followed by amplification of both the genes resulting in co-amplification of both loci.

HER-2 genetic heterogeneity of breast carcinomas sometimes makes it difficult to accurately analyze the biologic properties of individual cancers, especially in antigens with heterogeneous staining patterns. The data has shown that heterogeneous expression of HER-2-amplified tumors was seen frequently in contrast to the phenomenon being a rare event (3.4%). It may be associated with poor prognosis/outcome depending on the HER-2 overexpressing subclone and represents a true biological phenomenon. [31]

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report from Andhra Pradesh validating the use of IHC and FISH judiciously for HER-2/neu evaluation and in re-categorizing HER-2/neu status for determining eligibility for treatment with trastuzumab. In clinical practice, awareness of HER-2 and CEP17 copy number anomalies is necessary for correct interpretation to avoid misdiagnosis.

To summarize, HER-2 interpretation algorithm - first ascertain if signal patterns of the probes are usual or aberrant, involving copy number anomalies. If it is the former type, interpretation should be based on HER-2-CEP17 ratio and HER-2 genetic heterogeneity. If copy number anomalies are involved, evaluate the mean copy number of CEP17 signals and HER-2 signals; and if HER-2 copy number is >6 copies or/and HER-2 GH is seen in >50% invasive carcinoma cells, interpret the result as HER-2 amplified.


   Acknowledgments Top


We profusely thank Dr. Ch. Mohana Vamsy for providing breast carcinoma specimens for diagnosis and further evaluation. We thank Mrs. C Ajitha, Mrs. M. Padma, Mr. U. Sudhakar Reddy, Mr. U. Ravinder, Miss B. Manju and Miss D. Radhika for their excellent technical assistance for embedding and cutting of blocks, IHC and FISH.

 
   References Top

1.Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG, Levine WJ, Ullrich A, McGuire WL. Human breast Cancer: Correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER- 2/neuoncogene. Science 1987;235:177-82.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.Slamon DJ, Godolphin W, Jones LA, Holt JA, Wong SG, Keith DE, et al. Studies of the HER-2/neu proto-oncogene in human breast and ovarian cancer. Science 1989;244:707-12.  Back to cited text no. 2
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
3.Revillion F, Bonneterre J, Peyrat JP. ERBB2 oncogene in human breast cancer and its clinical significance. Eur J Cancer 1998;34:791-808.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.Ross JS, Fletcher JA, Linette GP, Stec J, Clark E, Ayers M, et al. HER-2/neu gene and protein in breast cancer 2003. Biomarker and target of therapy. Oncologist 2003;8:307-25 .  Back to cited text no. 4
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
5. Kaptain S, Tan LK, Chen B. Her-2/neu and breast cancer. Diagn Mol Pathol 2001;10:139-52.  Back to cited text no. 5
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
6.Lal P, Salazar PA, Ladanyi M, Chen B. Impact of polysomy 17 on HER-2/neuimmuno-histochemistry in breast carcinomas without HER-2/neu gene amplification. J Mol Diagn 2003;5:155-9.  Back to cited text no. 6
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
7.Kumar V, Tewari M, Singh U, Shukla HS. Significance of Her-2/neu protein over expression in Indian breast cancer patients. Indian J Surg 2007;69:122-8.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.Winston JS, Ramanaryanan J, Levine E. HER-2/neu evaluation in breast cancer: Are we there yet? Am J Clin Pathol 2004;121(suppl): S33-49.  Back to cited text no. 8
[PUBMED]    
9.Norum J, Risberg T, Olsen JA. A monoclonal antibody against HER-2 (trastuzumab) for metastatic breast cancer: A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Oncol 2005;16:909-11.  Back to cited text no. 9
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
10.Ridolfi RL, Jamehdor MR, Arber JM. HER-2/neu testing in breast carcinoma: A combined immunohistochemical and fluorescent in situ hybridization approach. Mod Pathol 2000;13:866-73.  Back to cited text no. 10
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
11.Hoang MP, Sahin AA, Ordonez NG, Sneige N. HER-2/neu gene amplification compared with HER-2/neu protein over expression in interobserver reproducability in invasive breast carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol 2000;13:852-9.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.Wang S, Saboorian MH, Frenkel E, Hynan L, Gokaslan ST, Ashfaq R. Laboratory assessment of the status of HER-2/neu protein and oncogene in breast cancer specimens: Comparison of immuno-histochemistry assay with fluorescence in situ hybridization assays. J Clin Pathol 2000;53:374-81.  Back to cited text no. 12
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
13.Pauletti G, Dandekar S, Rong HM, Ramos L, Peng HJ, Seshadri R, et al. Assessment of Methods for Tissue-Based Detection of the HER-2/neu: Alteration in Human Breast Cancer: A direct comparison of fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemis-try. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:3651-64.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.Tubbs RR, Pettay JD, Roche PC, Stoler MH, Jenkins RB, Grogan TM. Discrepancies in clinical laboratory testing of eligibility for trastuzumab therapy: Apparent immuno-histochemical false positives do not get the message. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:2714-21.  Back to cited text no. 14
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
15.Lebeau A, Deimling D, Kaltz C, Sendelhofert A, Iff A, Luthardt B, et al. HER-2/neu analysis in archival tissue samples of human breast cancer: Comparison of immunohisto-chemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:354-63.  Back to cited text no. 15
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
16.Sauter G, Lee J, Barlett JM, Slamon DJ, Press MF. Guidelines for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing: Biologic and methodologic considerations. J Clinical Oncol 2009;27:1323-33.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: Experience from a large study with long term follow up. Histopathology 1991;20:479-89.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.Wolff AC, Hammond EH, Schwartz JN, Hagerty KL, Allred DC, Cote RJ, et al. American Society of clinical Oncology/College of American pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:118-45.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, Hagerty KL, Allred DC, Cote RJ, et al . American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American pathologists. Guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2007;131:18-43.  Back to cited text no. 19
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
20.Vance GH, Barry TS, Bloom KJ, Fitzgibbons PL, Hicks DC, Jenkins RB, et al. Genetic heterogeneity in HER2 testing in Breast cancer: Panel summary and guidelines. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2009;133:611-2.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.Wang S, Saboorian MH, Frenkel EP, Haley BB, Siddiqui MT, Gokaslan S, et al . Aneusomy 17 in breast cancer: Its role in HER-2/neu protein expression and implication for clinical assessment of HER-2/neu status. Mod Pathol 2002;15:137-45.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.Panjwani P, Epari S, Karpate A, Shirsat H, Rajshekharan P, Basak R, et al. Assessment of HER2 status in breast cancer using Fluorescence in situ hybridization and immuno-chemistry: Experience of a tertiary cancer referral centre in India. Indian J Med Res 2010;132:287-94.  Back to cited text no. 22
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
23.Shin SJ, Hyjek E, Early E, Knowles DM. Intratumoral heterogeneity of HER 2 Neu in invasive mammary carcinomas using fluorescence in situ hybridization and tissue microarray. Int J Surg Pathol 2006;14:279-84.  Back to cited text no. 23
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
24.Stribel JM, Bhargava R, Horbinski C, Surti U, Dabbs DJ. The equivocally amplified HER2 FISH result on breast core biopsy: Indications for further sampling do affect patient management. Am J Clin Pathol 2008;129:383-90.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.Stark A, Hulka BS, Joens S, Novotny D, Thor AD, Wold L, et al. HER-2/neu amplification in benign breast disease and the risk of subsequent breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:267-74.  Back to cited text no. 25
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
26.Salido M, Corominas IT , Suarez MO, Suarez M, Espinet B, Corzo C, et al. Polysomy of chromosome 17 in breast cancer tumors showing an overexpression of ERBB2: A study of 175 cases using fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry. Breast Cancer Res 2005;7 : R267-73.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.Watters AD, Going JJ, Cooke TG, Bartlett JM. Chromosome 17 aneusomy is associated with poor prognostic factors in invasive breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2003;77:109-14.  Back to cited text no. 27
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
28.Bempt IV, Loo PV, Drijkoningen M, Neven P, Smeets A, Christiaens MR, et al. Polysomy 17 in breast cancer: Clinicopathologic significance and impact on HER2 testing. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:4869-74.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.Skaland I, Øvestad I, Janssen EA, Klos J, Kjellevold KH, Helliesen T, et al. Comparing subjective and digital image analysis HE2/neu expression scores with conventional and modified FISH scores in breast cancer. J Clin Pathol 2008;61:68-71.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.Grob T. HER2 testing in breast cancer: Reporting of unusual signal patterns. Xplore Newsletter Abbott Molecular Use of Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) for selection of patients for targeted therapies. Part 1. HER 2 testing in breast cancer patients. Part 2. EGFR testing in Lung cancer and colorectal cancer. 2010;9-10.   Back to cited text no. 30
    
31. Cottu PH, Asselah J, Lae M, Pierga JY, Dieras V, Mignot L, et al. Heterogeneous amplification of HER2 is a rare but clinically significant event in invasive ductal carcinoma. Ann Oncol 2008;19:595-7.  Back to cited text no. 31
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Sudha S Murthy
Department of Laboratory Medicine (Pathology and Molecular Diagnostics), Basavatarakam Indo-American Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, Road No. 14, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0377-4929.85087

Rights and Permissions


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4]

This article has been cited by
1 HER2 assessment by silverin situhybridization: where are we now?
Francesca Sanguedolce,Pantaleo Bufo
Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics. 2015; : 1
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Clinical significance of nucleophosmin/B23 and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2/neu expressions in gastric cancers
Fang Zhou,Wensheng Qiu,Lingling Sun,Jinyu Xiang,Xiaoxiao Sun,Aihua Sui,Aiping Ding,Lu Yue
APMIS. 2013; 121(7): 582
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 HER2 in situ hybridization in breast cancer: clinical implications of polysomy 17 and genetic heterogeneity
Wedad M Hanna,Josef Rüschoff,Michael Bilous,Renata A Coudry,Mitch Dowsett,Robert Y Osamura,Frédérique Penault-Llorca,Marc van de Vijver,Giuseppe Viale
Modern Pathology. 2013;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 HER-2 gene amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) compared with immunohistochemistry (IHC) in breast cancer: a study of 528 equivocal cases
Han Zhang,Guoping Ren,Xiaoling Wang,Jing Zhao,Hongtian Yao,Yanfeng Bai,Wang Bo
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 2012; 134(2): 743
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
5 In-situ-Hybridisierung in der klinischen Pathologie
T. Gaiser,J. Rüschoff,R. Moll
Der Pathologe. 2012; 33(S2): 307
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    Abstract
   Introduction
    Materials and Me...
   Results
   Discussion
   Acknowledgments
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed8207    
    Printed167    
    Emailed5    
    PDF Downloaded267    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 5    

Recommend this journal