Antonio C Wolff1, M Elizabeth H Hammond, David G Hicks, Mitch Dowsett, Lisa M McShane, Kimberly H Allison, Donald C Allred, John M S Bartlett, Michael Bilous, Patrick Fitzgibbons, Wedad Hanna, Robert B Jenkins, Pamela B Mangu, Soonmyung Paik, Edith A Perez, Michael F Press, Patricia A Spears, Gail H Vance, Giuseppe Viale, Daniel F Hayes. 1. Antonio C. Wolff, Johns Hopkins Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore; Lisa M. McShane, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; M. Elizabeth H. Hammond, University of Utah School of Medicine and Intermountain Healthcare, Salt Lake City, UT; David G. Hicks, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY; Mitch Dowsett, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, United Kingdom; Kimberly H. Allison, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford; Patrick Fitzgibbons, St Jude Medical Center, Fullerton; Michael F. Press, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA; Donald C. Allred, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO; John M.S. Bartlett, Ontario Institute for Cancer Research; Wedad Hanna, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Michael Bilous, University of Western Sydney and Healthscope Pathology, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Robert B. Jenkins, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Pamela B. Mangu, American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA; Soonmyung Paik, National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project, Pitsburgh, PA; Edith A. Perez, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL; Patricia A. Spears, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC; Gail H. Vance, Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN; Giuseppe Viale, University of Milan, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy; and Daniel F. Hayes, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Care Center, Ann Arbor, MI.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing in breast cancer to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing and its utility as a predictive marker in invasive breast cancer. METHODS: ASCO/CAP convened an Update Committee that included coauthors of the 2007 guideline to conduct a systematic literature review and update recommendations for optimal HER2 testing. RESULTS: The Update Committee identified criteria and areas requiring clarification to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing by immunohistochemistry (IHC) or in situ hybridization (ISH). The guideline was reviewed and approved by both organizations. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Update Committee recommends that HER2 status (HER2 negative or positive) be determined in all patients with invasive (early stage or recurrence) breast cancer on the basis of one or more HER2 test results (negative, equivocal, or positive). Testing criteria define HER2-positive status when (on observing within an area of tumor that amounts to >10% of contiguous and homogeneous tumor cells) there is evidence of protein overexpression (IHC) or gene amplification (HER2 copy number or HER2/CEP17 ratio by ISH based on counting at least 20 cells within the area). If results are equivocal (revised criteria), reflex testing should be performed using an alternative assay (IHC or ISH). Repeat testing should be considered if results seem discordant with other histopathologic findings. Laboratories should demonstrate high concordance with a validated HER2 test on a sufficiently large and representative set of specimens. Testing must be performed in a laboratory accredited by CAP or another accrediting entity. The Update Committee urges providers and health systems to cooperate to ensure the highest quality testing.
PURPOSE: To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing in breast cancer to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing and its utility as a predictive marker in invasive breast cancer. METHODS: ASCO/CAP convened an Update Committee that included coauthors of the 2007 guideline to conduct a systematic literature review and update recommendations for optimal HER2 testing. RESULTS: The Update Committee identified criteria and areas requiring clarification to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing by immunohistochemistry (IHC) or in situ hybridization (ISH). The guideline was reviewed and approved by both organizations. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Update Committee recommends that HER2 status (HER2 negative or positive) be determined in all patients with invasive (early stage or recurrence) breast cancer on the basis of one or more HER2 test results (negative, equivocal, or positive). Testing criteria define HER2-positive status when (on observing within an area of tumor that amounts to >10% of contiguous and homogeneous tumor cells) there is evidence of protein overexpression (IHC) or gene amplification (HER2 copy number or HER2/CEP17 ratio by ISH based on counting at least 20 cells within the area). If results are equivocal (revised criteria), reflex testing should be performed using an alternative assay (IHC or ISH). Repeat testing should be considered if results seem discordant with other histopathologic findings. Laboratories should demonstrate high concordance with a validated HER2 test on a sufficiently large and representative set of specimens. Testing must be performed in a laboratory accredited by CAP or another accrediting entity. The Update Committee urges providers and health systems to cooperate to ensure the highest quality testing.
Authors: Stuart D Russell; Kimberly L Blackwell; Julia Lawrence; John E Pippen; Matthew T Roe; Freda Wood; Virginia Paton; Eric Holmgren; Kenneth W Mahaffey Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-06-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Edith A Perez; Vera J Suman; Nancy E Davidson; Silvana Martino; Peter A Kaufman; Wilma L Lingle; Patrick J Flynn; James N Ingle; Daniel Visscher; Robert B Jenkins Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Lynne Dobson; Catherine Conway; Alan Hanley; Alex Johnson; Sean Costello; Anthony O'Grady; Yvonne Connolly; Hilary Magee; Daniel O'Shea; Michael Jeffers; Elaine Kay Journal: Histopathology Date: 2010-06-24 Impact factor: 5.087
Authors: Paul Roepman; Hugo M Horlings; Oscar Krijgsman; Marleen Kok; Jolien M Bueno-de-Mesquita; Richard Bender; Sabine C Linn; Annuska M Glas; Marc J van de Vijver Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-11-03 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Yun Wu; Maurizio Scaltriti; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Kelly K Hunt; Shaheenah Dawood; Francisco J Esteva; Aman U Buzdar; Huiqin Chen; Sameena Eksambi; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Jose Baselga; Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-11-17 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: C B Nunes; R M Rocha; J S Reis-Filho; M B Lambros; G F S Rocha; F S F Sanches; F N Oliveira; H Gobbi Journal: J Clin Pathol Date: 2008-05-12 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Marc van de Vijver; Michael Bilous; Wedad Hanna; Manfred Hofmann; Petra Kristel; Frédérique Penault-Llorca; Josef Rüschoff Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2007 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Charlotte K Y Ng; Salvatore Piscuoglio; Felipe C Geyer; Kathleen A Burke; Fresia Pareja; Carey A Eberle; Raymond S Lim; Rachael Natrajan; Nadeem Riaz; Odette Mariani; Larry Norton; Anne Vincent-Salomon; Y Hannah Wen; Britta Weigelt; Jorge S Reis-Filho Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2017-02-02 Impact factor: 12.531