Andrew Dodson1, Lila Zabaglo2, Belinda Yeo3, Keith Miller4, Ian Smith5, Mitch Dowsett1. 1. Academic Department of Biochemistry, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK. 2. Academic Department of Biochemistry, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK The Breakthrough Toby Robins Breast Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK. 3. Academic Department of Biochemistry, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK Department of Medicine, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK. 4. UK National External Quality Assessment for Immunocytochemistry and In-situ Hybridisation, University College London, London, UK. 5. Department of Medicine, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
Abstract
AIMS: The IHC4+C score combines assessment of oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR), HER2 and Ki67 with clinicopathological parameters to identify the risk of distant disease recurrence in patients with breast cancer, so, aiding treatment decision-making on adjuvant chemotherapy. Despite low cost and wide availability, the reported use of IHC4+C remains limited; one explanation for this is the perception that immunohistochemistry (IHC)-based methods and assessment of them lack precision, reproducibility and portability. We examined the effects of decentralised testing and easily reproducible estimate-based scoring methods on IHC4+C scores to determine its suitability for wider adoption. METHODS: Sections from a breast cancer tissue micro-array (TMA) were distributed to three centres undertaking diagnostic breast cancer IHC. Centres stained sections using their standard procedures, and returned them for central assessment. The results were compared with those obtained at IHC4+C's originating hospital (Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH)). In parallel, TMA sections stained at RMH were scored by a variety of simplified non-counting-based methods. The results were compared with those produced using counting. RESULTS: There was a high degree of correlation between individual IHC results produced by external centres and those of RMH (r: 0.797-0.982), and between risk of distant recurrence scores derived from them (r: 0.972-0.984). Scoring methods for ER and PgR could be adapted to require less precision without significantly affecting correlation with counted results (r: 0.933 and 0.980, respectively), but correlation between estimating and counting for Ki67 was poorer (r: 0.855). CONCLUSIONS: IHC4+C is tolerant of variation in staining and scoring methods. Although additional confirmatory comparative studies are required, these data support use of IHC4+C in clinical practice outside RMH. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
AIMS: The IHC4+C score combines assessment of oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR), HER2 and Ki67 with clinicopathological parameters to identify the risk of distant disease recurrence in patients with breast cancer, so, aiding treatment decision-making on adjuvant chemotherapy. Despite low cost and wide availability, the reported use of IHC4+C remains limited; one explanation for this is the perception that immunohistochemistry (IHC)-based methods and assessment of them lack precision, reproducibility and portability. We examined the effects of decentralised testing and easily reproducible estimate-based scoring methods on IHC4+C scores to determine its suitability for wider adoption. METHODS: Sections from a breast cancer tissue micro-array (TMA) were distributed to three centres undertaking diagnostic breast cancer IHC. Centres stained sections using their standard procedures, and returned them for central assessment. The results were compared with those obtained at IHC4+C's originating hospital (Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH)). In parallel, TMA sections stained at RMH were scored by a variety of simplified non-counting-based methods. The results were compared with those produced using counting. RESULTS: There was a high degree of correlation between individual IHC results produced by external centres and those of RMH (r: 0.797-0.982), and between risk of distant recurrence scores derived from them (r: 0.972-0.984). Scoring methods for ER and PgR could be adapted to require less precision without significantly affecting correlation with counted results (r: 0.933 and 0.980, respectively), but correlation between estimating and counting for Ki67 was poorer (r: 0.855). CONCLUSIONS: IHC4+C is tolerant of variation in staining and scoring methods. Although additional confirmatory comparative studies are required, these data support use of IHC4+C in clinical practice outside RMH. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Entities:
Keywords:
BREAST CANCER; CHEMOTHERAPY; IMMUNOCYTOCHEMISTRY; ONCOLOGY
Authors: Mark Francis Evans; Pamela Mary Vacek; Brian Lee Sprague; Gary Stephen Stein; Janet Lee Stein; Donald Lee Weaver Journal: J Cell Biochem Date: 2019-10-08 Impact factor: 4.429
Authors: Mustapha Abubakar; Jonine Figueroa; H Raza Ali; Fiona Blows; Jolanta Lissowska; Carlos Caldas; Douglas F Easton; Mark E Sherman; Montserrat Garcia-Closas; Mitch Dowsett; Paul D Pharoah Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2019-04-11 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Torsten O Nielsen; Samuel C Y Leung; David L Rimm; Andrew Dodson; Balazs Acs; Sunil Badve; Carsten Denkert; Matthew J Ellis; Susan Fineberg; Margaret Flowers; Hans H Kreipe; Anne-Vibeke Laenkholm; Hongchao Pan; Frédérique M Penault-Llorca; Mei-Yin Polley; Roberto Salgado; Ian E Smith; Tomoharu Sugie; John M S Bartlett; Lisa M McShane; Mitch Dowsett; Daniel F Hayes Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 13.506