A quality assurance exercise to evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of chromogenic in situ hybridisation for HER2 analysis in breast cancer

Journal of Clinical Pathology

Volumn 61, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 757-760

  Di Palma, Silvana ^a,b   Collins, N ^b   Bilous, M ^c   Sapino, A ^d   Mottolese, M ^e   Kapranos, N ^f   Schmitt, F ^g   Isola, J ^h  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SURREY   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL SURREY COUNTY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c WESTMEAD HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TURIN   (Italy)

^e REGINA ELENA NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (Italy)

^f Gastroenterology Department   (Greece)

^g University of Porto   (Portugal)

^h TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2;

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CHROMOGENIC IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; ONCOGENE NEU; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; REPRODUCIBILITY;

AUSTRALIA; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CHROMOGENIC COMPOUNDS; EUROPE; FEMALE; GENE AMPLIFICATION; GENES, ERBB-2; HUMANS; IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; OBSERVER VARIATION; QUALITY CONTROL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 45549096747     PISSN: 00219746     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jcp.2007.053850     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Wolff A, Hammond M, Schwartz J, 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.
2. Thomson T, Hayes M, Spinelli J, et al. HER-2/neu in breast cancer: interobserver variability and performance of immunohistochemistry with 4 antibodies compared with fluorescent in situ hybridization. Mod Pathol 2001;14:1079-86.
3. Tubbs R, et al. Discrepancies in clinical laboratory testing of eligibility for trastuzumab therapy: apparent immunohistochemical false-positives do not get the message. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:2714- 21.
4. Tsuda H, Sasano H, Takiyama F, et al. Evaluation of interobserver agreement in scoring immunohistochemical results of HER-2/neu (c-erbB-2) expression detected by HercepTest, Nichirei polyclonal antibody, CB11 and TAB250 in breast carcinoma. Pathol Int 2002;52:126-34.
5. Jacobs T, Gown A, Yaziji H, et al. Specificity of HercepTest in determining HER-2/neu status of breast cancers using the United States Food and Drug Administration-approved scoring system. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:1983-7.
6. Bartlett JM, Ibrahim M, Jasani B, et al. External quality assurance of HER2 fluorescence in situ hybridisation testing: results of a UK NEQAS pilot scheme. J Clin Pathol 2007;60:816-9.
7. Tuma R. Inconsistency of HER2 test raises questions. JNCI 2007;99:1064-5.
8. Saez A, Andreu FA, Segui MA, et al. HER-2 gene amplification by chromogenic in situ hybridisation (CISH) compared with fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) in breast cancer-A study of two hundred cases. Breast 2006;15:519-27.
9. Vocaturo A Novelli F, Benevolo M, et al. Chromogenic in situ hybridization to detect HER-2/neu gene amplification in histological and ThinPrep-processed breast cancer fine-needle aspirates: a sensitive and practical method in the trastuzumab era. Oncologist 2006;11:878- 86.
10. Gong Y, Gilcrease M, Sneige N. Reliability of chromogenic in situ hybridization for detecting HER-2 gene status in breast cancer: comparison with fluorescence in situ hybridization and assessment of interobserver reproducibility. Mod Pathol 2005;18:1015-21.
11. Isola J, Tanner M, Forsythe A, et al. Interlaboratory comparison of HER-2 oncogene amplification as detected by chromogenic and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10:4793- 8.
12. Bhargava R, Lal P, Chen B, et al. Chromogenic in situ hybridization for the detection of HER-2/neu gene amplification in breast cancer with an emphasis on tumors with borderline and low-level amplification: does it measure up to fluorescence in situ hybridization? Am J Clin Pathol 2005;123:237-43.
13. Hauser-Kronberger C, Dandachi N. Comparison of chromogenic in situ hybridization with other methodologies for HER2 status assessment in breast cancer. J Mol Histol 2004;35:647-53.
14. Arnould L, Denoux Y, MacGrogan G, et al. Agreement between chromogenic in situ hybridisation (CISH) and FISH in the determination of HER2 status in breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2003 19;88:1587-91.
15. Dandachi N, Dietze O, Hauser-Kronberger C. Chromogenic in situ hybridization: a novel approach to a practical and sensitive method for the detection of HER2 oncogene in archival human breast carcinoma. Lab Invest 2002;82:1007-14.
16. Bilous M, Morey A, Armes J, et al. Chromogenic in situ hybridisation testing for HER2 gene amplification in breast cancer produces highly reproducible results concordant with fluorescence in situ hybridisation and immunohistochemistry. Pathology 2006;38:120-4.
17. Hanna W, Kwok K. Chromogenic in-situ hybridization: a viable alternative to fluorescence in-situ hybridization in the HER2 testing algorithm. Mod Pathol 2006;19:481-7.
18. Van de Vijver M, Bilous M, Hanna W, et al. Chromogenic in situ hybridisation for the assessment of HER2 status in breast cancer: an international validation ring study. Breast Cancer Res 2007;9:R68.
19. Di Palma S, Collins N, Faulkes C, et al. Chromogenic in-situ hybridisation (CISH) should be an accepted method in the routine diagnostic evaluation of HER2 status in breast cancer. J Clin Pathol 2007;60:1067-8.
20. Joensuu H, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen PL, Bono P, et al. Adjuvant docetaxel or vinorelbine with or without trastuzumab for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2006;354:809-20.
21. Bilous M. HER2 testing recommendations in Australia. Pathology 2001;33:425-7.
22. Bilous M, Dowsett M, Hanna W, et al. Current perspectives on HER2 testing: a review of national testing guidelines. Mod Pathol 2003;16:173-82.
23. Ellis I, Bartlett J, Dowsett M, et al. Best practice no 176: updated recommendations for HER2 testing in the UK. J Clin Pathol 2004;57:233-7.
24. Fleiss JL. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull 1971;76:378-82.
25. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-74.
26. Paik S, Kim C, Jeong J. Benefit from adjuvant trastuzumab may not be confined to patients with IHC 3+ and/or FISH-positive tumors: central testing results from NSABP B-31. Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting; 1-5 June 2007, Chicago, Chicago: American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2007, abstract no 511.
27. Mass R, Press M, Anderson S, et al. Evaluation of clinical outcomes according to HER2 detection by fluorescence in situ hybridization in women with metastatic breast cancer treated with trastuzumab. Clin Breast Cancer 2005;6:240-6.
28. Mass R, Press M, Anderson S, et al. Improved survival benefit from Herceptin (trastuzumab) in patients selected by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2001;20:22a.
29. Arnould L, Arveux P, Couturier J, et al. Pathologic complete response to trastuzumab-based neoadjuvant therapy is related to the level of HER-2 amplification. Clin Can Res 2007:6404-9.