Literature DB >> 17334408

Quantitative analysis of estrogen receptor heterogeneity in breast cancer.

Gina G Chung1, Maciej P Zerkowski, Sriparna Ghosh, Robert L Camp, David L Rimm.   

Abstract

Immunohistochemical analyses (IHC) of biomarkers are extensively used for tumor characterization and as prognostic and predictive measures. The current standard of single slide analysis assumes that one 5 microM section is representative of the entire tumor. We used our automated image analysis technology (AQUA) using a modified IHC technique with fluorophores to compare estrogen receptor (ER) expression in multiple blocks/slides from cases of primary breast cancer with the objective of quantifying tumor heterogeneity within sections and between blocks. To normalize our ER scores and allow slide-to-slide comparisons, 0.6 microm histospots of representative breast cancer cases with known ER scores were assembled into a 'gold standard array' (GSA) and placed adjacently to each whole section. Overall, there was excellent correlation between AQUA scores and the pathologist's scores and reproducibility of GSA scores (mean linear regression R value 0.8903). Twenty-nine slides from 11 surgical cases were then analyzed totaling over 2000 AQUA images. Using standard binary assignments of AQUA (>10) and pathologist's (>10%) scores as being positive, there was fair concordancy between AQUA and pathologist scores (73%) and between slides from different blocks from the same cases (75%). However using continuous AQUA scores, agreement between AQUA and pathologist was far lower and between slides from different blocks from the same cases only 19%. Within individual slides there was also significant heterogeneity in a scattered pattern, most notably for slides with the highest AQUA scores. In sum, using a quantitative measure of ER expression, significant block-to-block heterogeneity was found in 81% of cases. These results most likely reflect both laboratory-based variability due to lack of standardization of immunohistochemistry and true biological heterogeneity. It is also likely to be dependent on the biomarker analyzed and suggests further studies should be carried out to determine how these findings may affect clinical decision-making processes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17334408     DOI: 10.1038/labinvest.3700543

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lab Invest        ISSN: 0023-6837            Impact factor:   5.662


  34 in total

Review 1.  Genetic susceptibility loci for breast cancer by estrogen receptor status.

Authors:  Montserrat Garcia-Closas; Stephen Chanock
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 2.  Role of positron emission tomography for the monitoring of response to therapy in breast cancer.

Authors:  Olivier Humbert; Alexandre Cochet; Bruno Coudert; Alina Berriolo-Riedinger; Salim Kanoun; François Brunotte; Pierre Fumoleau
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2015-01-05

3.  Cytoplasmic estrogen receptor in breast cancer.

Authors:  Allison W Welsh; Donald R Lannin; Gregory S Young; Mark E Sherman; Jonine D Figueroa; N Lynn Henry; Lisa Ryden; Chungyeul Kim; Richard R Love; Rachel Schiff; David L Rimm
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2011-10-06       Impact factor: 12.531

4.  Automation of immunohistochemical evaluation in breast cancer using image analysis.

Authors:  Keerthana Prasad; Avani Tiwari; Sandhya Ilanthodi; Gopalakrishna Prabhu; Muktha Pai
Journal:  World J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-04-10

5.  Estrogen receptor quantitative measures and breast cancer survival.

Authors:  Deirdre A Hill; Marc Barry; Charles Wiggins; Andrea Nibbe; Melanie Royce; Eric Prossnitz; Lesley Lomo
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2017-08-19       Impact factor: 4.872

Review 6.  Obstacles to precision oncology: confronting current factors affecting the successful introduction of biomarkers to the clinic.

Authors:  Ludmila Prudkin; Paolo Nuciforo
Journal:  Cell Oncol (Dordr)       Date:  2014-09-04       Impact factor: 6.730

7.  Comparison of evaluations of hormone receptors in breast carcinoma by image-analysis using three automated immunohistochemical stainings.

Authors:  Koji Arihiro; Miyo Oda; Katsunari Ogawa; Kenshi Tominaga; Yoshie Kaneko; Tomomi Shimizu; Shiho Ohnishi; Megumi Oda; Yuki Kurita; Yuko Taira; Masayoshi Fujii; Maiko Tanaka
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2010-08-26       Impact factor: 2.447

8.  Experimental validation of peptide immunohistochemistry controls.

Authors:  Steven A Bogen; Kodela Vani; Brian McGraw; Vin Federico; Iqbal Habib; Ron Zeheb; Ed Luther; Colin Tristram; Seshi R Sompuram
Journal:  Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol       Date:  2009-05

9.  Quantitative assessment of effect of preanalytic cold ischemic time on protein expression in breast cancer tissues.

Authors:  Veronique M Neumeister; Valsamo Anagnostou; Summar Siddiqui; Allison Michal England; Elizabeth R Zarrella; Maria Vassilakopoulou; Fabio Parisi; Yuval Kluger; David G Hicks; David L Rimm
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2012-10-22       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Intratumor Heterogeneity Affects Gene Expression Profile Test Prognostic Risk Stratification in Early Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Rekha Gyanchandani; Yan Lin; Hui-Min Lin; Kristine Cooper; Daniel P Normolle; Adam Brufsky; Michael Fastuca; Whitney Crosson; Steffi Oesterreich; Nancy E Davidson; Rohit Bhargava; David J Dabbs; Adrian V Lee
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2016-05-16       Impact factor: 12.531

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.