Literature DB >> 15757204

HER2 status in breast cancer determined by IHC and FISH: comparison of the results.

Anna Mrozkowiak1, Wojciech P Olszewski, Agata Piaścik, Włodzimierz T Olszewski.   

Abstract

HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) status became an important prognostic and predictive factor in breast carcinoma clinical management. There are two main techniques of evaluation of HER2 status: immunohistochemistry (IHC) for the protein expression and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for amplification of HER2 gene. The aim of the study was to compare the results obtained by IHC and FISH methods in determination of HER2 status in breast cancer. Three hundred and sixty breast cancer specimens were examined. Patients were operated in the Oncology Centre in Warsaw. IHC and FISH were performed in every case. IHC was performed with DAKO HercepTest and FISH with Oncor-QBiogene reagents. IHC results were classed into 4 groups, accordingly to the four-tier DAKO criteria system (0, 1+, 2+, 3+). FISH results were divided into three main categories: NA--no amplification, LA--low amplification and HA--high amplification. The number of copies of chromosome 17 was also assessed. Over 90% of cases described by IHC as 3+ exhibited amplification of HER2/neu gene. Remaining cases were positive with IHC, but presented no gene amplification. This might be due to the subjective assessment of the membrane staining. Another possibility is that overexpression of the protein was caused by mRNA stability or disorders in receptor degradation. The majority of cases classed by IHC as 2+ were also negative by FISH (80%). One fifth of IHC 2+ tumours were found to exhibit gene amplification. Remaining cases showed no amplification of HER2/neu gene, combined with aneuploidy of chromosome 17. All cases described by IHC as 0/1+ were also HER2-negative by FISH. IHC is well-established method of assessing HER2 status in breast cancer. Nonetheless, a group of cases described as 2+ should be additionally examined using FISH. The results obtained by the latter method are more reliable. In order to improve accuracy and gain the highest quality of HER2 status evaluation, in 2+ cases both methods should be applied.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15757204

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pol J Pathol        ISSN: 1233-9687            Impact factor:   1.072


  6 in total

1.  Biologic markers determine both the risk and the timing of recurrence in breast cancer.

Authors:  Laura J Esserman; Dan H Moore; Pamela J Tsing; Philip W Chu; Christina Yau; Elissa Ozanne; Robert E Chung; Vickram J Tandon; John W Park; Frederick L Baehner; Stig Kreps; Andrew N J Tutt; Cheryl E Gillett; Christopher C Benz
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-05-20       Impact factor: 4.872

Review 2.  Testing for HER2-positive breast cancer: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Nandini Dendukuri; Karim Khetani; Michelle McIsaac; James Brophy
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2007-05-08       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3.  The role of HER2 in early breast cancer metastasis and the origins of resistance to HER2-targeted therapies.

Authors:  Jaclyn A Freudenberg; Qiang Wang; Makoto Katsumata; Jeffrey Drebin; Izumi Nagatomo; Mark I Greene
Journal:  Exp Mol Pathol       Date:  2009-05-18       Impact factor: 3.362

4.  Evaluating HER2 Gene Amplification Using Chromogenic In Situ Hybridization (CISH) Method In Comparison To Immunohistochemistry Method in Breast Carcinoma.

Authors:  Hadi Atabati; Amir Raoofi; Abdollah Amini; Reza Masteri Farahani
Journal:  Open Access Maced J Med Sci       Date:  2018-11-20

5.  Correlation of ER, PR, and HER2 at the protein and mRNA levels in Asian patients with operable breast cancer.

Authors:  Chih-Jung Chen; Ting-Hao Chen; Jason Lei; Ji-An Liang; Po-Sheng Yang; Chiun-Sheng Huang; Chia-Ming Hsieh; Ling-Ming Tseng; Liang-Chih Liu; Skye Hung-Chen Cheng; Kuan-Hui Shih
Journal:  Biosci Rep       Date:  2022-01-28       Impact factor: 3.840

6.  Nomogram-derived prediction of pathologic complete response (pCR) in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT).

Authors:  Shengyu Pu; Ke Wang; Yang Liu; Xiaoqin Liao; Heyan Chen; Jianjun He; Jian Zhang
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 4.430

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.