High concordance of protein (by IHC), gene (by FISH; HER2 only), and microarray readout (by TargetPrint) of ER, PgR, and HER2: Results from the EORTC 10041/BIG 03-04 MINDACT trial

Annals of Oncology

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 816-823

  Viale, G ^a   Slaets, L ^b   Bogaerts, J ^b   Rutgers, E ^c   Van't veer, L ^c,d,e   Piccart gebhart, M J ^f   De snoo, F A ^e   Stork sloots, L ^e   Russo, L ^a   Dell'orto, P ^a   Van den akker, J ^e   Glas, A ^e   Cardoso, F ^g  

^a EUROPEAN INSTITUTE OF ONCOLOGY   (Italy)

^b EORTC DATA CENTER   (Belgium)

^c NETHERLANDS CANCER INSTITUTE   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^e Agendia NV   (Netherlands)

^f JULES BORDET INSTITUTE   (Belgium)

^g Champalimaud Cancer Center   (Portugal)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Concordance; FISH; Hormone receptor; IHC; TargetPrint

Indexed keywords

EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; MESSENGER RNA; PROGESTERONE RECEPTOR; ERBB2 PROTEIN, HUMAN; TUMOR MARKER;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER PATIENT; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); ER GENE; FEMALE; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; HER2 GENE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; IMMUNOREACTIVITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MICROARRAY ANALYSIS; MICROARRAY KIT; PGR GENE; PILOT STUDY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; AGED; BIOSYNTHESIS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; GENETICS; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROGNOSIS; PROTEIN SYNTHESIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STATISTICS;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION, FLUORESCENCE; MICROARRAY ANALYSIS; MIDDLE AGED; PROGNOSIS; PROTEIN BIOSYNTHESIS; RECEPTOR, ERBB-2; RECEPTORS, ESTROGEN; RECEPTORS, PROGESTERONE; RNA, MESSENGER; STATISTICS AS TOPIC; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 84897055057     PISSN: 09237534     EISSN: 15698041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdu026     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Rutgers E, Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Bogaerts J et al. The EORTC 10041/BIG 03-04 MINDACT trial is feasible: results of the pilot phase. Eur J Cancer 2011;00: 2742-2749.
2. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/ College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:2784-2795.
3. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS et al. Strategies for subtypes-dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Ann Oncol 2011;22:1736-1747.
4. Aebi S, Davidson T, Gruber G et al. Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2011;22(Suppl 6): vi12-vi24.
5. National Comprehensive Cancer Network: NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Breast Cancer. Version 2.2013. 2013. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/ physician_gls/pdf/breast.pdf (23 December 2013, date last accessed).
6. Cardoso F, Saghatchian M, Thompson A et al. Inconsistent criteria used in American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2058-2059. author reply 2060-2061.
7. Bogaerts J, Cardoso F, Buyse M et al. Gene signature evaluation as a prognostic tool: challenges in the design of the MINDACT trial. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2006;3: 540-551.
8. Rhodes A, Jasani B, Barnes DM et al. Reliability of immunohistochemical demonstration of oestrogen receptors in routine practice: interlaboratory variance in the sensitivity of detection and evaluation of scoring systems. J Clin Pathol 2000;53:125-130.
9. Roepman P, Horlings HM, Krijgsman O et al. Microarray-based determination of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 receptor status in breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2009;15:7003-7011.
10. Glas AM, Floore A, Delahaye LJ et al. Converting a breast cancer microarray signature into a high-throughput diagnostic test. BMC Genomics 2006;7:278.
11. US Food and Drug Administration: Guidance for industry and FDA staff: Statistical guidance on reporting results from studies evaluating diagnostic tests. http://medical.cms.itri.org.tw/pdf/u14.pdf (23 December 2013, date last accessed).
12. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 1960; 20:37-46.
13. Cardoso F, Van't Veer L, Rutgers E et al. Clinical application of the 70-gene profile: the MINDACT trial. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:729-735.
14. Bordeaux JM, Cheng H, Welsh AW et al. Quantitative in situ measurement of estrogen receptor mRNA predicts response to tamoxifen. PLoS One 2012;7: e36559.
15. Nielsen TO, Parker JS, Leung S et al. A comparison of PAM50 intrinsic subtyping with immunohistochemistry and clinical prognostic factors in tamoxifen-treated estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2010;16: 5222-5232.
16. Ma XJ, Hilsenbeck SG, Wang W et al. The HOXB13:IL17BR expression index is a prognostic factor in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:4611-4619.
17. Baehner FL, Achacoso N, Maddala T et al. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 assessment in a case-control study: comparison of fluorescence in situ hybridization and quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction performed by central laboratories. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:4300-4306.
18. Dabbs DJ, Klein ME, Mohsin SK et al. High false-negative rate of HER2 quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction of the Oncotype DX test: an independent quality assurance study. J Clin Oncol 2011;29: 4279-4285.
19. Bergqvist J, Ohd JF, Smeds J et al. Quantitative real-time PCR analysis and microarray-based RNA expression of HER2 in relation to outcome. Ann Oncol 2007;18:845-850.