Sneha S Chavan1, Savithri Ravindra2, Msn Prasad3. 1. Postgraduate Student, Department of Pathology, Kempegowda Institute of Medical Sciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Pathology, Kempegowda Institute of Medical Sciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. 3. Consultant Pathologist, Department of Pathology, Sri Shankara Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Estrogen Receptor (ER), Progesterone Receptor (PR) and Her2/neu are routinely studied markers for breast carcinoma. Analysis of these biomarkers is traditionally done by Immunohistochemistry (IHC) on whole sections. These markers can also be studied on Tissue Microarray (TMA) sections. Tissue microarray is a technique where core samples from different paraffin blocks are arrayed on a single recipient block which can then be cut to yield a single section with multiple cores in it. AIM: To compare ER, PR and Her2/neu on TMA sections with whole sections and to determine the concordance of results between the two methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A TMA block was constructed by punching out 2 mm cores from appropriately marked paraffin blocks of 53 breast carcinoma cases and embedding them in the recipient block. Immunostaining of TMA sections and whole sections were performed for ER, PR and Her2/neu and the results were compared. Statistical analysis was done using chi square test/Fisher-Exact test. Kappa co-efficient, Jaccard Index and G-Index were computed. RESULTS: Infiltrating Ductal Carcinoma-No Special Type (IDC-NST) was the predominant type of carcinoma and most of the tumours were of Grade II and III. Majority, 38/53 (71.7%) were ER/PR positive and Her2 negative and 9/53 (17%) cases were triple negative. Good concordance between whole sections and TMA sections were noted with kappa value for ER, PR and Her2/neu being 0.671, 0.754, 1.000 respectively which was statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Immunostaining for ER, PR and Her2/neu done on TMA section using single 2 mm core were comparable with conventional whole section scores. Thus, TMA is a reliable method for evaluating these biomarkers with the advantage of being time and cost effective.
INTRODUCTION:Estrogen Receptor (ER), Progesterone Receptor (PR) and Her2/neu are routinely studied markers for breast carcinoma. Analysis of these biomarkers is traditionally done by Immunohistochemistry (IHC) on whole sections. These markers can also be studied on Tissue Microarray (TMA) sections. Tissue microarray is a technique where core samples from different paraffin blocks are arrayed on a single recipient block which can then be cut to yield a single section with multiple cores in it. AIM: To compare ER, PR and Her2/neu on TMA sections with whole sections and to determine the concordance of results between the two methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A TMA block was constructed by punching out 2 mm cores from appropriately marked paraffin blocks of 53 breast carcinoma cases and embedding them in the recipient block. Immunostaining of TMA sections and whole sections were performed for ER, PR and Her2/neu and the results were compared. Statistical analysis was done using chi square test/Fisher-Exact test. Kappa co-efficient, Jaccard Index and G-Index were computed. RESULTS: Infiltrating Ductal Carcinoma-No Special Type (IDC-NST) was the predominant type of carcinoma and most of the tumours were of Grade II and III. Majority, 38/53 (71.7%) were ER/PR positive and Her2 negative and 9/53 (17%) cases were triple negative. Good concordance between whole sections and TMA sections were noted with kappa value for ER, PR and Her2/neu being 0.671, 0.754, 1.000 respectively which was statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Immunostaining for ER, PR and Her2/neu done on TMA section using single 2 mm core were comparable with conventional whole section scores. Thus, TMA is a reliable method for evaluating these biomarkers with the advantage of being time and cost effective.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast carcinoma; Estrogen receptor; Her2/Neu
Authors: Katrine L Henriksen; Birgitte B Rasmussen; Anne E Lykkesfeldt; Susann Møller; Bent Ejlertsen; Henning T Mouridsen Journal: J Clin Pathol Date: 2006-06-14 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Valeria Sebastiani; Claudio Botti; Ugo Di Tondo; Paolo Visca; Laura Pizzuti; Giuseppe Santeusanio; Piero Luigi Alo Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2006 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.480
Authors: Emad A Rakha; Maysa E El-Sayed; Andrew H S Lee; Christopher W Elston; Matthew J Grainge; Zsolt Hodi; Roger W Blamey; Ian O Ellis Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-05-19 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Urszula Ciesielska; Aleksandra Piotrowska; Christopher Kobierzycki; Wojciech Pastuszewski; Marzenna Podhorska-Okolow; Piotr Dziegiel; Katarzyna Nowinska Journal: In Vivo Date: 2020 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.155
Authors: Jasmin Zeindler; Savas Deniz Soysal; Salvatore Piscuoglio; Charlotte K Y Ng; Robert Mechera; Andrej Isaak; Walter Paul Weber; Simone Muenst; Christian Kurzeder Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2019-09-13