Cristiana Nunes1, Rafael Rocha2, Marcelo Buzelin3, Débora Balabram3, Fernanda Foureaux3, Simone Porto3, Helenice Gobbi3. 1. Department of Anatomic Pathology, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. Electronic address: cristianabnunes@gmail.com. 2. Department of Anatomic Pathology, AC Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, Brazil. 3. Department of Anatomic Pathology, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Whole slide imaging (WSI) technology has been used for training, teaching, researching, and remote consultation. Few studies compared HER2 expression using optical microscopy (OM) and WSI evaluations in breast carcinomas. However, no consensus has been achieved comparing both assessments. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sections from tissue microarray containing 200 preselected invasive breast carcinomas were submitted to immunohistochemistry applying three anti-HER2 antibodies (HercepTest™, CB11, SP3) and in situ hybridization (DDISH). Slides were evaluated using OM and WSI (Pannoramic MIDI and Viewer, 3DHISTECH). Sensitivity and specificity were calculated comparing the anti-HER2 antibodies and DDISH. RESULTS: WSI and OM HER2 evaluations agreement was considered good (SP3, k=0.80) to very good (CB11 and HercepTest™, k=0.81). WSI evaluation led to higher sensitivity (ranging from 100 of SP3 and HercepTest™ to 97 of CB11) and lower specificity (ranging from 86.4 of SP3 to 89.4 of HercepTest™) compared to OM evaluation (sensitivity ranged from 92.1 of CB11 to 98 of SP3 and specificity ranged from 95.2 of SP3 and HercepTest™ to 97.1 of CB11 and SP3). CONCLUSION: High agreement was achieved between WSI and OM evaluations. All three antibodies were highly sensitive and specific using both evaluations. WSI can be considered a useful tool for HER2 immunohistochemical assessment.
UNLABELLED: Whole slide imaging (WSI) technology has been used for training, teaching, researching, and remote consultation. Few studies compared HER2 expression using optical microscopy (OM) and WSI evaluations in breast carcinomas. However, no consensus has been achieved comparing both assessments. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sections from tissue microarray containing 200 preselected invasive breast carcinomas were submitted to immunohistochemistry applying three anti-HER2 antibodies (HercepTest™, CB11, SP3) and in situ hybridization (DDISH). Slides were evaluated using OM and WSI (Pannoramic MIDI and Viewer, 3DHISTECH). Sensitivity and specificity were calculated comparing the anti-HER2 antibodies and DDISH. RESULTS: WSI and OM HER2 evaluations agreement was considered good (SP3, k=0.80) to very good (CB11 and HercepTest™, k=0.81). WSI evaluation led to higher sensitivity (ranging from 100 of SP3 and HercepTest™ to 97 of CB11) and lower specificity (ranging from 86.4 of SP3 to 89.4 of HercepTest™) compared to OM evaluation (sensitivity ranged from 92.1 of CB11 to 98 of SP3 and specificity ranged from 95.2 of SP3 and HercepTest™ to 97.1 of CB11 and SP3). CONCLUSION: High agreement was achieved between WSI and OM evaluations. All three antibodies were highly sensitive and specific using both evaluations. WSI can be considered a useful tool for HER2 immunohistochemical assessment.
Authors: Bih-Rong Wei; Charles H Halsey; Shelley B Hoover; Munish Puri; Howard H Yang; Brandon D Gallas; Maxwell P Lee; Weijie Chen; Amy C Durham; Jennifer E Dwyer; Melissa D Sánchez; Ryan P Traslavina; Chad Frank; Charles Bradley; Lawrence D McGill; D Glen Esplin; Paula A Schaffer; Sarah D Cramer; L Tiffany Lyle; Jessica Beck; Elizabeth Buza; Qi Gong; Stephen M Hewitt; R Mark Simpson Journal: Acad Pathol Date: 2019-07-11
Authors: Sanjay Mukhopadhyay; Michael D Feldman; Esther Abels; Raheela Ashfaq; Senda Beltaifa; Nicolas G Cacciabeve; Helen P Cathro; Liang Cheng; Kumarasen Cooper; Glenn E Dickey; Ryan M Gill; Robert P Heaton; René Kerstens; Guy M Lindberg; Reenu K Malhotra; James W Mandell; Ellen D Manlucu; Anne M Mills; Stacey E Mills; Christopher A Moskaluk; Mischa Nelis; Deepa T Patil; Christopher G Przybycin; Jordan P Reynolds; Brian P Rubin; Mohammad H Saboorian; Mauricio Salicru; Mark A Samols; Charles D Sturgis; Kevin O Turner; Mark R Wick; Ji Y Yoon; Po Zhao; Clive R Taylor Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 6.394