Literature DB >> 21176180

Pre-analytic variables and phospho-specific antibodies: the Achilles heel of immunohistochemistry.

Summar Siddiqui, David L Rimm.   

Abstract

Immunohistochemistry is the most common method for companion diagnostic testing in breast cancer. The readings for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and Her2 directly affect prescription of critical therapies. However, immunohistochemistry is highly sensitive to innumerable pre-analytic variables that result in loss of signal in these assays. Perhaps the most significant pre-analytic variable is cold ischemic time. The work of Pinhel and colleagues in the previous issue of Breast Cancer Research examines the effects of cold ischemic time and finds a chilling result. The authors show that while the classic markers may be only mildly affected, phospho-specific markers are highly sensitive to this artifact. As a result, it is likely that future companion diagnostic tests that include phospho-specific epitopes will be reliably done only in core needle biopsies that minimize ischemic time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21176180      PMCID: PMC3046444          DOI: 10.1186/bcr2782

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res        ISSN: 1465-5411            Impact factor:   6.466


Immunohistochemistry (IHC) has been broadly accepted as a companion diagnostic method to assist clinicians in the prescription of targeted therapies. However, it was recently observed that the quality of the biomarker study is highly dependent on quality of the tissue. The quality of the tissue is dramatically affected by pre-analytic variables. Thousands of uncontrolled variables that affect every tissue specimen could alter the results of companion diagnostic testing. Some common examples include cold ischemic time, intraoperative hypoxia, section thickness, type of fixative, processor protocols, and scores of other subtle and not so subtle variables. Although it is impossible to control for all pre-analytic variables, efforts to characterize their effects are under way. In the previous issue of Breast Cancer Research, Pinhel and colleagues [1] examined the effects of time to fixation by the measurement of protein expression of traditional breast cancer biomarkers in a timed series of core needle biopsies and the conventional resection specimens. The authors compared the expression of estrogen receptor (ER), Her2, progesterone receptor (PgR), ki-67, p-Akt, and p-Erk in each set and used conventional IHC with semi-quantitative readouts and found no significant difference between the expression of ER, Her2, PgR, and ki-67 in the core needle specimens with a median time difference of 30 minutes. Comparison with tumor resection samples from the same patient also showed no significant difference except that a lower ER value was seen in the conventional resection compared with the biopsy. These findings suggest that if epitope degradation occurs during the ischemic time prior to fixation, its impact may be limited to borderline cases. The impact for phospho-epitopes is not so subtle. Here, Pinhel and colleagues show a dramatic loss of antigenicity for both p-Akt and p-Erk1/2 when comparing the cores with conventional resections. Although these markers are not routinely used in current diagnostic testing, their potential for sensing pathway activation has made them extremely popular candidate markers for companion diagnostics for kinase inhibitors [2]. The work of Pinhel and colleagues shows significantly lower levels of the phospho-epitopes in tumor resection samples with longer time to fixation. This work suggests that the timing and tissue handling are critical for biomarker assessment of phospho-proteins in clinical specimens. Since delayed time to fixation can alter the phosphorylation status in resection specimens, use of these epitopes in companion diagnostic tests will likely have to be limited to core needle biopsies. The work of Pinhel and colleagues validates data seen in other studies that have shown the decrease in phospho-protein biomarker expression as a function of time to fixation [3-5]. Work in our lab has also quantified this loss for these and other phospho-epitopes while showing less change in the non-phospho-sensitive epitopes of the same proteins (Yalai Bai and colleagues, Department of Pathology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA, manuscript submitted). Thus, although phospho-proteins are a tempting target, they present unique challenges. Most likely, this is explained by the fact that phospho-epitopes are highly sensitive to phosphatases. In fact, it is the transient balance between kinases and phosphatases that is critical in cell proliferation, cell migration, and other pathways in tumor progression [6]. Most likely, the loss of the phospho-epitopes is due to the unregulated phosphatase activity seen in ischemic conditions or early-stage tissue degradation that occurs prior to fixation. Can anything be done to address this issue of pre-analytic variability? Efforts have been made to standardize tissue management in the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guidelines for Her2 [7] and for ER and PgR [8]. The guide-lines stipulate a maximum of 1 hour between resection and fixation and a minimum of 6 hours in fixative. Clinical trial groups have also set guidelines for specimen handling [9]. However, the concept of biospecimen science is still relatively new. Historically, work characterizing time to fixation and other pre-analytic variables was not recognized as important and was difficult to publish. As a result, the issued guidelines are based on a very limited body of literature [10-12]. The paper of Pinhel and colleagues and similar studies are welcome additions to the literature. No doubt, there will soon be others since the National Institutes of Health has recently established the Office of Biorepositories and Biospecimen Research and has funded a series of studies on bio-specimen science. The work of the funded investigators and works like this article by Pinhel and colleagues are likely to be cited as key evidence to form the basis of future guidelines for companion diagnostic tests.

Abbreviations

ER: estrogen receptor; IHC: immunohistochemistry; PgR: progesterone receptor.

Competing interests

DLR is a co-founder of, consultant to, and stockholder in HistoRx Inc. (Branford, CT, USA) and Metamark Genetics Inc. (Cambridge, MA, USA). However, this editorial does not refer to any technologies related to those companies. SS declares that he has no competing interests.
  12 in total

1.  A portrait of tissue phosphoprotein stability in the clinical tissue procurement process.

Authors:  Virginia Espina; Kirsten H Edmiston; Michael Heiby; Mariaelena Pierobon; Manuela Sciro; Barbara Merritt; Stacey Banks; Jianghong Deng; Amy J VanMeter; David H Geho; Lucia Pastore; Joel Sennesh; Emanuel F Petricoin; Lance A Liotta
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2008-07-30       Impact factor: 5.911

2.  Recommendations for collection and handling of specimens from group breast cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Brian R Leyland-Jones; Christine B Ambrosone; John Bartlett; Matthew J C Ellis; Rebecca A Enos; Adekunle Raji; Michael R Pins; Jo Anne Zujewski; Stephen M Hewitt; John F Forbes; Mark Abramovitz; Sofia Braga; Fatima Cardoso; Nadia Harbeck; Carsten Denkert; Scott D Jewell
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-10-27       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 3.  A thousand and one protein kinases.

Authors:  T Hunter
Journal:  Cell       Date:  1987-09-11       Impact factor: 41.582

4.  American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer.

Authors:  M Elizabeth H Hammond; Daniel F Hayes; Mitch Dowsett; D Craig Allred; Karen L Hagerty; Sunil Badve; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Glenn Francis; Neil S Goldstein; Malcolm Hayes; David G Hicks; Susan Lester; Richard Love; Pamela B Mangu; Lisa McShane; Keith Miller; C Kent Osborne; Soonmyung Paik; Jane Perlmutter; Anthony Rhodes; Hironobu Sasano; Jared N Schwartz; Fred C G Sweep; Sheila Taube; Emina Emilia Torlakovic; Paul Valenstein; Giuseppe Viale; Daniel Visscher; Thomas Wheeler; R Bruce Williams; James L Wittliff; Antonio C Wolff
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 5.534

5.  Pathway-based identification of biomarkers for targeted therapeutics: personalized oncology with PI3K pathway inhibitors.

Authors:  Jannik N Andersen; Sriram Sathyanarayanan; Alessandra Di Bacco; An Chi; Theresa Zhang; Albert H Chen; Brian Dolinski; Manfred Kraus; Brian Roberts; William Arthur; Rich A Klinghoffer; Diana Gargano; Lixia Li; Igor Feldman; Bethany Lynch; John Rush; Ronald C Hendrickson; Peter Blume-Jensen; Cloud P Paweletz
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2010-08-04       Impact factor: 17.956

6.  Minimum formalin fixation time for consistent estrogen receptor immunohistochemical staining of invasive breast carcinoma.

Authors:  Neal S Goldstein; Monica Ferkowicz; Eva Odish; Anju Mani; Farnaz Hastah
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 2.493

7.  The use of cell line standards to reduce HER-2/neu assay variation in multiple European cancer centers and the potential of automated image analysis to provide for more accurate cut points for predicting clinical response to trastuzumab.

Authors:  Anthony Rhodes; Duncan Borthwick; Rob Sykes; Salam Al-Sam; Angelo Paradiso
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 2.493

8.  Delay to formalin fixation effect on breast biomarkers.

Authors:  Thaer Khoury; Sheila Sait; Helena Hwang; Rameela Chandrasekhar; Gregory Wilding; Dongfeng Tan; Swati Kulkarni
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2009-09-04       Impact factor: 7.842

9.  American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer.

Authors:  Antonio C Wolff; M Elizabeth H Hammond; Jared N Schwartz; Karen L Hagerty; D Craig Allred; Richard J Cote; Mitchell Dowsett; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Wedad M Hanna; Amy Langer; Lisa M McShane; Soonmyung Paik; Mark D Pegram; Edith A Perez; Michael F Press; Anthony Rhodes; Catharine Sturgeon; Sheila E Taube; Raymond Tubbs; Gail H Vance; Marc van de Vijver; Thomas M Wheeler; Daniel F Hayes
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 5.534

10.  Extreme loss of immunoreactive p-Akt and p-Erk1/2 during routine fixation of primary breast cancer.

Authors:  Isabel F Pinhel; Fiona A Macneill; Margaret J Hills; Janine Salter; Simone Detre; Roger A'hern; Ashutosh Nerurkar; Peter Osin; Ian E Smith; Mitch Dowsett
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 6.466

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Pragmatic issues in biomarker evaluation for targeted therapies in cancer.

Authors:  Armand de Gramont; Sarah Watson; Lee M Ellis; Jordi Rodón; Josep Tabernero; Aimery de Gramont; Stanley R Hamilton
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-11-25       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 2.  Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: Predictive value of immunohistochemical markers for postoperative survival.

Authors:  Zhao-Shan Niu; Xiao-Jun Niu; Mei Wang
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2015-01-27

Review 3.  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

4.  Trastuzumab as a preoperative monotherapy does not inhibit HER2 downstream signaling in HER2-positive breast cancer.

Authors:  Maëva Lion; Alexandre Harlé; Julia Salleron; Carole Ramacci; Mario Campone; Jean-Louis Merlin
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2016-07-20       Impact factor: 2.967

Review 5.  Post-translational modifications of nuclear receptors and human disease.

Authors:  Muralidharan Anbalagan; Brandy Huderson; Leigh Murphy; Brian G Rowan
Journal:  Nucl Recept Signal       Date:  2012-02-27

6.  Phosphorylated p-70S6K predicts tamoxifen resistance in postmenopausal breast cancer patients randomized between adjuvant tamoxifen versus no systemic treatment.

Authors:  Karin Beelen; Mark Opdam; Tesa M Severson; Rutger H T Koornstra; Andrew D Vincent; Jelle Wesseling; Jettie J Muris; Els M J J Berns; Jan B Vermorken; Paul J van Diest; Sabine C Linn
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 6.466

7.  Rapid two-temperature formalin fixation.

Authors:  David Chafin; Abbey Theiss; Esteban Roberts; Grace Borlee; Michael Otter; Geoffrey S Baird
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Revisiting the technical validation of tumour biomarker assays: how to open a Pandora's box.

Authors:  Caterina Marchiò; Mitch Dowsett; Jorge S Reis-Filho
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2011-04-19       Impact factor: 8.775

9.  Phospho-T356RB1 predicts survival in HPV-negative squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck.

Authors:  Tim N Beck; John Kaczmar; Elizabeth Handorf; Anna Nikonova; Cara Dubyk; Suraj Peri; Miriam Lango; John A Ridge; Ilya G Serebriiskii; Barbara Burtness; Erica A Golemis; Ranee Mehra
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2015-08-07
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.