» Articles » PMID: 15614619

Comparison of Chromogenic in Situ Hybridization with Other Methodologies for HER2 Status Assessment in Breast Cancer

Overview
Journal J Mol Histol
Specialty Biochemistry
Date 2004 Dec 23
PMID 15614619
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The high incidence of human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)2 overexpression on breast and various other cancer cells and the prognostic and potentially predictive value of HER2 render this growth receptor a novel and important therapeutic target. Out of a wide range of assays that have been used in research for the detection of HER2 status, only two techniques are now predominant and readily applicable in the routine clinical pathology laboratory: determination of HER2 overexpression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and HER2 gene amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH). In a retrospective study on a cohort of 173 archival invasive breast carcinomas a chromogenic in situ hybridisation (CISH) assay for the detection of HER2 amplification was established. Results were compared to HercepTest, which is the most frequently used method for detecting HER2 alteration. Additionally, HER2 gene copy number was investigated using differential PCR (dPCR) as a testing system. Discrepant cases between CISH and HercepTest and all IHC positive cases (2 + and 3 +), a total of 42 cases, were analysed with FISH Path Vysion(Vysis) assay. HER2 overexpression was found by IHC in 24.3%, HER2 amplification by CISH in 19.1% and by dPCR in 9.2% of the tumours. The overall concordance rate between CISH and IHC was 95.9%, between dPCR and IHC 85% and between CISH and FISH 100%, respectively. Among 25 HercepTest positive cases (score 3+) two showed no gene amplification and four out of 13 tumours with score 2 + were negative with CISH and FISH. The current study showed that CISH offers an ideal approach that allows detection of HER2 amplification in the context of morphology, whereas the major drawback of dPCR is the impracticability of tissue differentiation of invasive and non-invasive carcinoma.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of Immunohistochemistry-Equivocal (2+) HER2 Gene Status in Invasive Breast Cancer by Silver DNA in Situ Hybridization (SISH) and its Association with Clinicopathological Variables.

A Musa Z, J Qasim B, A K Al Shaikhly A Iran J Pathol. 2018; 12(1):9-19.

PMID: 29760748 PMC: 5938719.


Chromogenic in situ hybridization compared with other approaches to evaluate HER2/neu status in breast carcinomas.

Rosa F, Santos R, Rogatto S, Domingues M Braz J Med Biol Res. 2013; 46(3):207-16.

PMID: 23558859 PMC: 3854374. DOI: 10.1590/1414-431x20132483.


The 70-gene prognostic signature for korean breast cancer patients.

Na K, Kim K, Lee J, Kim H, Yang J, Ahn S J Breast Cancer. 2011; 14(1):33-8.

PMID: 21847392 PMC: 3148507. DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2011.14.1.33.


Development of Targeted Therapies in ErbB2-Positive Breast Cancer.

Jackisch C, Ruschoff J, Ullrich A Breast Care (Basel). 2010; 3(s1):3-6.

PMID: 20824001 PMC: 2930989. DOI: 10.1159/000119745.


Prospective multi-centre study to validate chromogenic in situ hybridisation for the assessment of HER2 gene amplification in specimens from adjuvant and metastatic breast cancer patients.

Riethdorf S, Hoegel B, John B, Ott G, Fritz P, Thon S J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2010; 137(2):261-9.

PMID: 20396915 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-010-0881-0.


References
1.
Schnitt S, Jacobs T . Current status of HER2 testing: caught between a rock and a hard place. Am J Clin Pathol. 2002; 116(6):806-10. DOI: 10.1309/WMN8-VTR5-DUGF-X12L. View

2.
Press M, Bernstein L, Thomas P, Meisner L, Zhou J, Ma Y . HER-2/neu gene amplification characterized by fluorescence in situ hybridization: poor prognosis in node-negative breast carcinomas. J Clin Oncol. 1997; 15(8):2894-904. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1997.15.8.2894. View

3.
Pellegrini C, Falleni M, Marchetti A, Cassani B, Miozzo M, Buttitta F . HER-2/Neu alterations in non-small cell lung cancer: a comprehensive evaluation by real time reverse transcription-PCR, fluorescence in situ hybridization, and immunohistochemistry. Clin Cancer Res. 2003; 9(10 Pt 1):3645-52. View

4.
Foy C, Parkes H . Emerging homogeneous DNA-based technologies in the clinical laboratory. Clin Chem. 2001; 47(6):990-1000. View

5.
Tanner M, Gancberg D, Di Leo A, Larsimont D, Rouas G, Piccart M . Chromogenic in situ hybridization: a practical alternative for fluorescence in situ hybridization to detect HER-2/neu oncogene amplification in archival breast cancer samples. Am J Pathol. 2000; 157(5):1467-72. PMC: 1885742. DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)64785-2. View