Literature DB >> 24101045

Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update.

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.   

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. This guideline was developed through a collaboration between the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists and has been published jointly by invitation and consent in both Journal of Clinical Oncology and the Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine.
Copyright © 2013 American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24101045     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2013.50.9984

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  1285 in total

1.  Accuracy and Reproducibility of HER2 Status in Breast Cancer Using Immunohistochemistry: A Quality Control Study in Tuscany Evaluating the Impact of Updated 2013 ASCO/CAP Recommendations.

Authors:  S Bianchi; S Caini; M Paglierani; C Saieva; V Vezzosi; G Baroni; A Simoni; D Palli
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 3.201

2.  A Root Cause Analysis Into the High Error Rate in Clinical Immunohistochemistry.

Authors:  Steven A Bogen
Journal:  Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol       Date:  2019-02-22

3.  Long-Lasting Exceptional Radiological Complete Response after Treatment with Eribulin in a Patient with Triple-Negative Breast Cancer with Liver Involvement.

Authors:  Lorenzo Dottorini; Laura Catena; Italo Sarno; Giandomenico Di Menna; Annamaria Marte; Emilio Bajetta
Journal:  Oncology       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 2.935

4.  Triple-negative and HER2 positive ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: characteristics, behavior, and biomarker profile.

Authors:  Satoshi Takahashi; Aye Aye Thike; Valerie Cui Yun Koh; Hironobu Sasano; Puay Hoon Tan
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 4.064

5.  68Ga-NOTA-RM26 PET/CT in the Evaluation of Breast Cancer: A Pilot Prospective Study.

Authors:  Jie Zang; Feng Mao; Hao Wang; Jingjing Zhang; Qingxing Liu; Li Peng; Fang Li; Lixin Lang; Xiaoyuan Chen; Zhaohui Zhu
Journal:  Clin Nucl Med       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 7.794

6.  Phase II Study of Weekly Paclitaxel with Trastuzumab and Pertuzumab in Patients with Human Epidermal Growth Receptor 2 Overexpressing Metastatic Breast Cancer: 5-Year Follow-up.

Authors:  Rui Wang; Lillian M Smyth; Neil Iyengar; Sarat Chandarlapaty; Shanu Modi; Maxine Jochelson; Sujata Patil; Larry Norton; Clifford A Hudis; Chau T Dang
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2019-01-02

7.  Breast Biomarkers-Comparison on Whole Section and Tissue Microarray Section.

Authors:  Sneha S Chavan; Savithri Ravindra; Msn Prasad
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2017-03-01

Review 8.  A critical analysis of cancer biobank practices in relation to biospecimen quality.

Authors:  Amanda Rush; Kevin Spring; Jennifer A Byrne
Journal:  Biophys Rev       Date:  2015-10-22

9.  Heterogeneity in the expression of receptors in the human breast cancer metastasized to the brain.

Authors:  Prema S Rao; Morgan Labhart; Susan L Mayhew; Seshadri Thirumala; U Subrahmanyeswara Rao
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2014-04-29

10.  A novel protein-based prognostic signature improves risk stratification to guide clinical management in early-stage lung adenocarcinoma patients.

Authors:  Elena Martínez-Terroba; Carmen Behrens; Fernando J de Miguel; Jackeline Agorreta; Eduard Monsó; Laura Millares; Cristina Sainz; Miguel Mesa-Guzman; José Luis Pérez-Gracia; María Dolores Lozano; Javier J Zulueta; Ruben Pio; Ignacio I Wistuba; Luis M Montuenga; María J Pajares
Journal:  J Pathol       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 7.996

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.