AIMS: The American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) updated the testing guideline in 2018 to address issues arising from uncommon human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) fluorescence in-situ hybridisation (FISH) results according to the 2013 guideline. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) may be used to better classify patients. The aim of this study was to assess the ERBB2 amplification status of invasive breast carcinoma with equivocal HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) results by using NGS, focusing on Group 4 (HER2/CEP17 ratio of <2.0; average HER2 signals/cell of ≥4.0 and <6.0). METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively reviewed HER2 FISH and NGS data of HER2 IHC-equivocal breast carcinomas at our centre between January 2009 and September 2019, wherein all three assays were performed on the same tissue block, and compared HER2 FISH results, according to the 2018 ASCO/CAP guideline, and the ERBB2 amplification status determined with NGS. A total of 52 HER2 FISH and NGS results from 51 patients with HER2 IHC-equivocal breast carcinomas were reviewed. The cohort included eight cases classified as 2018 ASCO/CAP in-situ hybridisation Group 1, three classified as Group 2, three classified as Group 3, 14 classified as Group 4, and 24 classified as Group 5. Thirteen of 14 (92.9%) Group 4 (HER2-negative) cases were classified as ERBB2-non-amplified by the use of NGS; the discordant case was later classified as Group 1 with alternative sample FISH testing. NGS revealed no significant difference in somatic mutations or copy number alterations between Groups 4 and 5. CONCLUSIONS: Our NGS findings support the reclassification of HER2 FISH-equivocal cases as HER2-negative under the 2018 ASCO/CAP guideline.
AIMS: The American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) updated the testing guideline in 2018 to address issues arising from uncommon human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) fluorescence in-situ hybridisation (FISH) results according to the 2013 guideline. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) may be used to better classify patients. The aim of this study was to assess the ERBB2 amplification status of invasive breast carcinoma with equivocal HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) results by using NGS, focusing on Group 4 (HER2/CEP17 ratio of <2.0; average HER2 signals/cell of ≥4.0 and <6.0). METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively reviewed HER2 FISH and NGS data of HER2 IHC-equivocal breast carcinomas at our centre between January 2009 and September 2019, wherein all three assays were performed on the same tissue block, and compared HER2 FISH results, according to the 2018 ASCO/CAP guideline, and the ERBB2 amplification status determined with NGS. A total of 52 HER2 FISH and NGS results from 51 patients with HER2 IHC-equivocal breast carcinomas were reviewed. The cohort included eight cases classified as 2018 ASCO/CAP in-situ hybridisation Group 1, three classified as Group 2, three classified as Group 3, 14 classified as Group 4, and 24 classified as Group 5. Thirteen of 14 (92.9%) Group 4 (HER2-negative) cases were classified as ERBB2-non-amplified by the use of NGS; the discordant case was later classified as Group 1 with alternative sample FISH testing. NGS revealed no significant difference in somatic mutations or copy number alterations between Groups 4 and 5. CONCLUSIONS: Our NGS findings support the reclassification of HER2 FISH-equivocal cases as HER2-negative under the 2018 ASCO/CAP guideline.
Authors: Sara A Hurvitz; Miguel Martin; W Fraser Symmans; Kyung Hae Jung; Chiun-Sheng Huang; Alastair M Thompson; Nadia Harbeck; Vicente Valero; Daniil Stroyakovskiy; Hans Wildiers; Mario Campone; Jean-François Boileau; Matthias W Beckmann; Karen Afenjar; Rodrigo Fresco; Hans-Joachim Helms; Jin Xu; Yvonne G Lin; Joseph Sparano; Dennis Slamon Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-11-23 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Raza S Hoda; Edi Brogi; Jin Xu; Katia Ventura; Dara S Ross; Chau Dang; Mark Robson; Larry Norton; Monica Morrow; Hannah Y Wen Journal: Arch Pathol Lab Med Date: 2019-10-24 Impact factor: 5.534
Authors: Antonio C Wolff; M Elizabeth H Hammond; Jared N Schwartz; Karen L Hagerty; D Craig Allred; Richard J Cote; Mitchell Dowsett; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Wedad M Hanna; Amy Langer; Lisa M McShane; Soonmyung Paik; Mark D Pegram; Edith A Perez; Michael F Press; Anthony Rhodes; Catharine Sturgeon; Sheila E Taube; Raymond Tubbs; Gail H Vance; Marc van de Vijver; Thomas M Wheeler; Daniel F Hayes Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-12-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Dara S Ross; Ahmet Zehir; Donavan T Cheng; Ryma Benayed; Khedoudja Nafa; Jaclyn F Hechtman; Yelena Y Janjigian; Britta Weigelt; Pedram Razavi; David M Hyman; José Baselga; Michael F Berger; Marc Ladanyi; Maria E Arcila Journal: J Mol Diagn Date: 2016-12-25 Impact factor: 5.568
Authors: Michael F Press; Richard S Finn; David Cameron; Angelo Di Leo; Charles E Geyer; Ivonne E Villalobos; Angela Santiago; Roberta Guzman; Armen Gasparyan; Yanling Ma; Kathy Danenberg; Anne Marie Martin; Lisa Williams; Cristina Oliva; Steven Stein; Robert Gagnon; Michael Arbushites; Maria T Koehler Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-12-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Sally Agersborg; Christopher Mixon; Thanh Nguyen; Sramila Aithal; Sucha Sudarsanam; Forrest Blocker; Lawrence Weiss; Robert Gasparini; Shiping Jiang; Wayne Chen; Gregory Hess; Maher Albitar Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-03-22 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Weiyi Toy; Yang Shen; Helen Won; Bradley Green; Rita A Sakr; Marie Will; Zhiqiang Li; Kinisha Gala; Sean Fanning; Tari A King; Clifford Hudis; David Chen; Tetiana Taran; Gabriel Hortobagyi; Geoffrey Greene; Michael Berger; José Baselga; Sarat Chandarlapaty Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2013-11-03 Impact factor: 38.330