BACKGROUND: Estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) immunohistochemistry (IHC) guide the clinical management of breast cancer metastases. Decalcification of bone core needle biopsies (CNBs) can affect IHC. In the current study, the authors sought to define whether fine-needle aspiration (FNA) would be a better alternative to CNB for reliable IHC. METHODS: Patients with breast cancer metastases to bone that were sampled by both CNB and FNA were selected. ER, PR, and HER2 were performed in FNA cell blocks (FNA-CBs) and concurrent decalcified CNBs. Discrepancies were classified as minor when there was a difference of up to 30% nuclear staining in IHC for ER and PR between paired samples and as major when a clinically relevant change was observed (ie, positive vs negative). Quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction of ESR1 messenger RNA levels was performed on FNA/CNB pairs with discrepancies for ER IHC. IHC status of the primary breast carcinoma was recorded. RESULTS: Concordance rates for ER, PR, and HER2 were 89%, 67%, and 93%, respectively, between FNA-CB and CNB pairs from 27 patients. Major discrepancies were noted in approximately 11% of FNA/CNB pairs for ER IHC and in 33% of FNA/CNB pairs for PR. ESR1 messenger RNA levels of FNA/CNB matched samples were similar and did not explain the differences in ER IHC expression in the majority of cases. Two of 27 FNA/CNB pairs had different results for HER2 IHC that changed from negative on CNB to equivocal (2+) on FNA-CB. Both cases had prior HER2 amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization. CONCLUSIONS: FNA-CB and CNB appear to constitute acceptable methods for the assessment of ER, PR, and HER2 for clinical decision making.
BACKGROUND:Estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and humanepidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) immunohistochemistry (IHC) guide the clinical management of breast cancer metastases. Decalcification of bone core needle biopsies (CNBs) can affect IHC. In the current study, the authors sought to define whether fine-needle aspiration (FNA) would be a better alternative to CNB for reliable IHC. METHODS:Patients with breast cancer metastases to bone that were sampled by both CNB and FNA were selected. ER, PR, and HER2 were performed in FNA cell blocks (FNA-CBs) and concurrent decalcified CNBs. Discrepancies were classified as minor when there was a difference of up to 30% nuclear staining in IHC for ER and PR between paired samples and as major when a clinically relevant change was observed (ie, positive vs negative). Quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction of ESR1 messenger RNA levels was performed on FNA/CNB pairs with discrepancies for ER IHC. IHC status of the primary breast carcinoma was recorded. RESULTS: Concordance rates for ER, PR, and HER2 were 89%, 67%, and 93%, respectively, between FNA-CB and CNB pairs from 27 patients. Major discrepancies were noted in approximately 11% of FNA/CNB pairs for ER IHC and in 33% of FNA/CNB pairs for PR. ESR1 messenger RNA levels of FNA/CNB matched samples were similar and did not explain the differences in ER IHC expression in the majority of cases. Two of 27 FNA/CNB pairs had different results for HER2 IHC that changed from negative on CNB to equivocal (2+) on FNA-CB. Both cases had prior HER2 amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization. CONCLUSIONS: FNA-CB and CNB appear to constitute acceptable methods for the assessment of ER, PR, and HER2 for clinical decision making.
Authors: G Curigliano; V Bagnardi; G Viale; L Fumagalli; N Rotmensz; G Aurilio; M Locatelli; G Pruneri; S Giudici; M Bellomi; P Della Vigna; L Monfardini; F Orsi; F Nolè; E Munzone; A Goldhirsch Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Pushpalatha K A Idirisinghe; Aye Aye Thike; Poh Yian Cheok; Gary Man-Kit Tse; Philip Chi-Wai Lui; Stephanie Fook-Chong; Nan Soon Wong; Puay Hoon Tan Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 2.493
Authors: Eitan Amir; Mark Clemons; Colin A Purdie; Naomi Miller; Phil Quinlan; William Geddie; Robert E Coleman; Orit C Freedman; Lee B Jordan; Alastair M Thompson Journal: Cancer Treat Rev Date: 2011-12-16 Impact factor: 12.111
Authors: E Amir; W S Ooi; C Simmons; H Kahn; M Christakis; S Popovic; M Kalina; A Chesney; G Singh; M Clemons Journal: Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) Date: 2008-09-27 Impact factor: 4.126
Authors: Sohrab P Shah; Ryan D Morin; Jaswinder Khattra; Leah Prentice; Trevor Pugh; Angela Burleigh; Allen Delaney; Karen Gelmon; Ryan Guliany; Janine Senz; Christian Steidl; Robert A Holt; Steven Jones; Mark Sun; Gillian Leung; Richard Moore; Tesa Severson; Greg A Taylor; Andrew E Teschendorff; Kane Tse; Gulisa Turashvili; Richard Varhol; René L Warren; Peter Watson; Yongjun Zhao; Carlos Caldas; David Huntsman; Martin Hirst; Marco A Marra; Samuel Aparicio Journal: Nature Date: 2009-10-08 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Salvatore Piscuoglio; Charlotte Ky Ng; Melissa Murray; Kathleen A Burke; Marcia Edelweiss; Felipe C Geyer; Gabriel S Macedo; Akiko Inagaki; Anastasios D Papanastasiou; Luciano G Martelotto; Caterina Marchio; Raymond S Lim; Rafael A Ioris; Pooja K Nahar; Ino De Bruijn; Lillian Smyth; Muzaffar Akram; Dara Ross; John H Petrini; Larry Norton; David B Solit; Jose Baselga; Edi Brogi; Marc Ladanyi; Britta Weigelt; Jorge S Reis-Filho Journal: J Pathol Date: 2016-01-25 Impact factor: 7.996
Authors: M Elizabeth H Hammond; Daniel F Hayes; Mitch Dowsett; D Craig Allred; Karen L Hagerty; Sunil Badve; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Glenn Francis; Neil S Goldstein; Malcolm Hayes; David G Hicks; Susan Lester; Richard Love; Pamela B Mangu; Lisa McShane; Keith Miller; C Kent Osborne; Soonmyung Paik; Jane Perlmutter; Anthony Rhodes; Hironobu Sasano; Jared N Schwartz; Fred C G Sweep; Sheila Taube; Emina Emilia Torlakovic; Paul Valenstein; Giuseppe Viale; Daniel Visscher; Thomas Wheeler; R Bruce Williams; James L Wittliff; Antonio C Wolff Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-04-19 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Britta Weigelt; Felipe C Geyer; Rachael Natrajan; Maria A Lopez-Garcia; Amar S Ahmad; Kay Savage; Bas Kreike; Jorge S Reis-Filho Journal: J Pathol Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 7.996