Literature DB >> 17536315

A new rabbit monoclonal antibody (4B5) for the immunohistochemical (IHC) determination of the HER2 status in breast cancer: comparison with CB11, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and interlaboratory reproducibility.

William C Powell1, David G Hicks, Nichole Prescott, Shannon M Tarr, Simas Laniauskas, Tristin Williams, Sarah Short, James Pettay, Raymond B Nagle, David J Dabbs, Katherine M Scott, Richard W Brown, Thomas Grogan, Patrick C Roche, Raymond R Tubbs.   

Abstract

The 2 methodologies in current clinical use to assess HER2 status in breast cancer are: fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) (gene amplification) and immunohistochemistry (protein over-expression). A consistent finding has been that 3% to 15% of breast cancers over-express HER2 protein without evidence for gene amplification. Accurate determination of the HER2 status has implications for selecting patients most likely to respond to trastuzumab. We report here our preliminary experience with a new anti-HER2 rabbit monoclonal antibody, 4B5. The evaluation of HER2 status in 2 different cohorts of breast cancer cases (Single Institution (SI) and Multinational (MN)) with a total of 322 breast cancer cases was performed on an automated staining system (Ventana Medical Systems, Inc, Tucson, AZ) and scored by 3 pathologists (0-3+), for comparison with CB11 staining results (PATHWAY) and FISH (PathVysion). Interlaboratory reproducibility of automated staining results and interpretation was determined on a subset of the SI cohort at 3 separate laboratories. Rabbit monoclonal 4B5 demonstrated sharper membrane staining with less cytoplasmic and stromal background staining than CB11. In the SI cohort, the staining results for 4B5 were highly comparable with those obtained for CB11 with an overall concordance of 93.3%. In the multinational cohort, the overall concordance with CB11 was 84.7%. This lower level of concordance was associated with a much higher overall agreement of 4B5 with FISH (89.5%), compared with agreement of CB11 with FISH (81.2%). The difference in the performance of CB11 in the MN cohort versus the SI cohort may be due to differences in tissue fixation and processing in a centralized, high volume laboratory in an academic medical center versus multiple sites in the international community with potentially nonstandardized techniques. The staining results with 4B5 indicate that it has a more robust performance than CB11 because the correlation of 4B5 with FISH was nearly equivalent (88.2% MN; 89.3% SI) in both cohorts. Interlaboratory reproducibility was also excellent (kappa 1.0). RMoAb 4B5 provides excellent sensitivity, specificity, and interlaboratory reproducibility for the detection of HER2 status in breast cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17536315     DOI: 10.1097/pai.0b013e31802ced25

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol        ISSN: 1533-4058


  15 in total

1.  Rabbit monoclonal antibody: potential application in cancer therapy.

Authors:  Lifeng Feng; Xian Wang; Hongchuan Jin
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2011-04-23       Impact factor: 4.060

Review 2.  Practical implications of gene-expression-based assays for breast oncologists.

Authors:  Aleix Prat; Matthew J Ellis; Charles M Perou
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 66.675

3.  Correlation of HER2 overexpression with gene amplification and its relation to chromosome 17 aneuploidy: a 5-year experience with invasive ductal and lobular carcinomas.

Authors:  Aziza Nassar; Andras Khoor; Reshmitha Radhakrishnan; Anu Radhakrishnan; Cynthia Cohen
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2014-08-15

4.  The identification of a small but significant subset of patients still targetable with anti-HER2 inhibitors when affected by triple negative breast carcinoma.

Authors:  Eleonora Brunello; Giuseppe Bogina; Emilio Bria; Marco Vergine; Giuseppe Zamboni; Serena Pedron; Isabella Daniele; Jenny Furlanetto; Luisa Carbognin; Marcella Marconi; Erminia Manfrin; Merdol Ibrahim; Keith Miller; Giampaolo Tortora; Annamaria Molino; Bharat Jasani; Serena Beccari; Franco Bonetti; Marco Chilosi; Guido Martignoni; Matteo Brunelli
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-07-28       Impact factor: 4.553

5.  Delineation of HER2 gene status in breast carcinoma by silver in situ hybridization is reproducible among laboratories and pathologists.

Authors:  Antonino Carbone; Gerardo Botti; Annunziata Gloghini; Gianni Simone; Mauro Truini; Maria Pia Curcio; Patrizia Gasparini; Anita Mangia; Tiziana Perin; Sandra Salvi; Adele Testi; Paolo Verderio
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2008-10-02       Impact factor: 5.568

6.  Comprehensive immunohistochemical analysis of Her-2/neu oncoprotein overexpression in breast cancer: HercepTest (Dako) for manual testing and Her-2/neuTest 4B5 (Ventana) for Ventana BenchMark automatic staining system with correlation to results of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH).

Authors:  Doris Mayr; Sibylle Heim; Cedric Werhan; Evelyn Zeindl-Eberhart; Thomas Kirchner
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2009-01-24       Impact factor: 4.064

7.  HER2 status in gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinomas assessed by two rabbit monoclonal antibodies (SP3 and 4B5) and two in situ hybridization methods (FISH and SISH).

Authors:  James E Boers; Harriëtte Meeuwissen; Natalie Methorst
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2011-02-16       Impact factor: 5.087

8.  Testing for HER2 in Breast Cancer: A Continuing Evolution.

Authors:  Sejal Shah; Beiyun Chen
Journal:  Patholog Res Int       Date:  2010-12-06

9.  Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) immunoreactivity: specificity of three pharmacodiagnostic antibodies.

Authors:  Anne-Sofie Schrohl; Hans Christian Pedersen; Sussie Steen Jensen; Signe Lykke Nielsen; Nils Brünner
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 5.087

10.  Inter-observer reproducibility of HER2 immunohistochemical assessment and concordance with fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH): pathologist assessment compared to quantitative image analysis.

Authors:  Gulisa Turashvili; Samuel Leung; Dmitry Turbin; Kelli Montgomery; Blake Gilks; Rob West; Melinda Carrier; David Huntsman; Samuel Aparicio
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2009-05-29       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.