Integrated tumor identification and automated scoring minimizes pathologist involvement and provides new insights to key biomarkers in breast cancer

Laboratory Investigation

Volumn 98, Issue 1, 2018, Pages 15-26

  Bankhead, Peter ^a   Fernández, José A ^a   McArt, Darragh G ^a   Boyle, David P ^a   Li, Gerald ^a   Loughrey, Maurice B ^a,b   Irwin, Gareth W ^a   Harkin, D Paul ^a   James, Jacqueline A ^a,b   McQuaid, Stephen ^a,b   Salto Tellez, Manuel ^a,b   Hamilton, Peter W ^a  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL GROUP OF HOSPITALS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; KI 67 ANTIGEN; PROGESTERONE RECEPTOR; PROTEIN P53; ERBB2 PROTEIN, HUMAN; TUMOR MARKER;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER PROGNOSIS; COHORT ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIGITAL IMAGING; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PATHOLOGIST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TISSUE MICROARRAY; BREAST; BREAST TUMOR; CANCER GRADING; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EVALUATION STUDY; FOLLOW UP; IMAGE PROCESSING; METABOLISM; NORTHERN IRELAND; PATHOLOGY; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SOFTWARE;

BIOMARKERS, TUMOR; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; NEOPLASM GRADING; NORTHERN IRELAND; PRECISION MEDICINE; RECEPTOR, ERBB-2; RECEPTORS, ESTROGEN; RECEPTORS, PROGESTERONE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFTWARE; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TISSUE ARRAY ANALYSIS;

EID: 85042774586     PISSN: 00236837     EISSN: 15300307     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/labinvest.2017.131     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Salto-Tellez M. Principles of Molecular Diagnostics and Personalized Cancer Medicine. Tan D, Lynch HT (eds). Wolters Kluwer Health, 2013, 196-205.
2. Salto-Tellez M, James JA, Hamilton PW. Molecular pathology-the value of an integrative approach. Mol Oncol 2014;8:1163-1168.
3. Maxwell P, Salto-Tellez M. Validation of immunocytochemistry as a morphomolecular technique. Cancer Cytopathol 2016;124:540-545.
4. Elliott K, McQuaid S, Salto-Tellez M, et al. Immunohistochemistry should undergo robust validation equivalent to that of molecular diagnostics. J Clin Pathol 2015;68:766-770.
5. Varga Z, Diebold J, Dommann-Scherrer C, et al. How reliable is Ki-67 immunohistochemistry in grade 2 breast carcinomas? A QA study of the Swiss Working Group of Breast-and Gynecopathologists. PLoS ONE 2012;7:e37379.
6. Polley M-YC, Leung SC, McShane LM, et al. An international Ki67 reproducibility study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012;105:1897-1906.
7. Hamilton PW, Bankhead P, Wang Y, et al. Digital pathology and image analysis in tissue biomarker research. Methods 2014;70:59-73.
8. Boyle DP, McArt DG, Irwin G, et al. The prognostic significance of the aberrant extremes of p53 immunophenotypes in breast cancer. Histopathology 2014;65:1-13.
9. Zabaglo L, Salter J, Anderson H, et al. Comparative validation of the SP6 antibody to Ki67 in breast cancer. J Clin Pathol 2010;63:800-804.
10. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2007;131:18-43.
11. Walker RA, Bartlett JM, Dowsett M, et al. HER2 testing in the UK: further update to recommendations. J Clin Pathol 2008;61:818-824.
12. McCarty KS, Szabo E, Flowers JL, et al. Use of a monoclonal antiestrogen receptor antibody in the immunohistochemical evaluation of human tumors. Cancer Res 1986;46:4244s-4248s.
13. Goulding H, Pinder S, Cannon P, et al. A new immunohistochemical antibody for the assessment of estrogen receptor status on routine formalin-fixed tissue samples. Hum Pathol 1995;26:291-294.
14. Ruifrok AC, Johnston DA. Quantification of histochemical staining by color deconvolution. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 2001;23:291-299.
15. Breiman L. Random forests. Mach Learn 2001;45:5-32 2001.
16. Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, A'Hern R, et al. Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer working group. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103:1656-1664 (2011).
17. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG, et al. Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:3997-4013.
18. Rakha EA, Pinder SE, Bartlett JM, et al. Updated UK Recommendations for HER2 assessment in breast cancer. J Clin Pathol 2015;68:93-99.
19. Lausen B, Schumacher M. Evaluating the effect of optimized cutoff values in the assessment of prognostic factors. Comput Stat Data Anal 1996;21:307-326.
20. Altman DG, Sauerbrei W, Schumacher M. Dangers of using 'optimal' cutpoints in the evaluation of prognostic factors. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994;86:829-835.
21. Hilsenbeck SG, Clark GM. Practical p-value adjustment for optimally selected cutpoints. Stat Med 1996;15:103-112.
22. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Core Team, R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2016, URL http://www.R-project.org/.
23. Therneau T, A Package for Survival Analysis in S. version 2.38 2015 https://CRAN.R-project.org/package = survival.
24. Polley M-YC, Leung SC, McShane LM, et al. An international Ki67 reproducibility study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2013;105:1897-1906.
25. Parker RL, Huntsman DG, Lesack DW, et al. Assessment of interlaboratory variation in the immunohistochemical determination of estrogen receptor status using a breast cancer tissue microarray. Am J Clin Pathol 2002;117:723-728.
26. Stålhammar G, Fuentes-Martinez N, Lippert M, et al. Digital image analysis outperforms manual biomarker assessment in breast cancer. Mod Pathol 2016;29:318-329.
27. Harvey JM, Clark GM, Osborne CK, et al. Estrogen receptor status by immunohistochemistry is superior to the ligand-binding assay for predicting response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:1474-1481.
28. Coates AS, Millar EK, O'Toole SA, et al. Prognostic interaction between expression of p53 and estrogen receptor in patients with nodenegative breast cancer: results from IBCSG Trials VIII and IX. Breast Cancer Res 2012;14:R143.
29. Brown JR, DiGiovanna MP, Killelea B, et al. Quantitative assessment Ki-67 score for prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Lab Invest 2014;94:98-106.
30. Fasching PA, Heusinger K, Haeberle L, et al. Ki67 chemotherapy response and prognosis in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment. BMC Cancer 2011;11:486.