Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

  • Register
  • Log in
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • Focus on Computer Resources
    • 75th Anniversary
    • Meeting Abstracts
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • OnlineFirst
    • Editors' Picks
    • Citations
    • Author/Keyword
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • AACR Publications
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Cancer Research
Cancer Research

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • Focus on Computer Resources
    • 75th Anniversary
    • Meeting Abstracts
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • OnlineFirst
    • Editors' Picks
    • Citations
    • Author/Keyword
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
Poster Session Abstracts

Abstract P5-10-03: Audit of the accuracy of immunohistochemical (IHC) testing of HER2 negative status of breast cancer in the United Kingdom

Bharat Jasani, Fiona Campbell, Phillapa Jones, Jane Gilbert, James Dowd, Keith Miller, Merdol Ibrahim, Ian Ellis, Emma Hurley, Mary Falzon, Barrett-Lee Peter and Jane Starczynski
Bharat Jasani
Cardiff University School of Medicine
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Fiona Campbell
Cardiff & Vale LHB
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Phillapa Jones
University College, Advanced Diagnostics
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jane Gilbert
Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
James Dowd
Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Keith Miller
University College, Advanced Diagnostics
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Merdol Ibrahim
UKNEQAS for IHC & ISH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ian Ellis
Nottingham University Hospitals
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Emma Hurley
Source BioScience
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mary Falzon
University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Barrett-Lee Peter
Velindre Cancer Centre
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jane Starczynski
Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.SABCS14-P5-10-03 Published May 2015
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading
Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; December 9-13, 2014; San Antonio, TX

Abstract

Background: The analysis of the level and distribution of HER2 protein expressed by cancer cells (HER2 status) is of great clinical value in the management of breast cancer patients both for the determination of the prognosis of disease and for identification of those patients who are eligible for anti-HER2 therapy. Accurate assessment of the HER2 status is essential for identifying patients which will benefit from HER2 targeted therapy. HER2 status in the UK is established using a two tier strategy with IHC as the initial test and subsequent reflex of equivocal results to in situ hybridization (ISH). IHC staining of the HER2 protein is graded as 0, 1+, 2+ or 3+ dependent upon the intensity of staining, cellular localisation and the percentage

of cells positive in accordance with CAP/ASCO and UK guidelines. HER2 3+ cases are considered as positive, with HER2 2+ cases (equivocal) retested by ISH to ascertain the gene amplification status. Cases that are scored as 0 and 1+ by IHC have no additional testing and are classed as negative. The literature indicates that a subset of these IHC negative cases show HER2 gene amplification by FISH (range 1.1-11.5%). The aim of this audit is to evaluate the discordance rate of HER2 IHC negative,

FISH positive breast cancer in the UK, with a secondary objective to resolve if this is related to the choice of antibody and assay platform used.

Materials and methods: This audit selected a total of 600 sequential cases reported as HER2 negative on IHC, from three UK reference centres receiving cases from 29 different hospitals. The cases were given a unique identifying number and annonymised. Each of the three centres used a different IHC method for frontline HER2 testing with centre one using HercepTestTM (DAKO), centre two Pathway 4B5 (Roche), and centre three, Oracle (Leica Microsystems). HER2 gene amplification status was determined using dual colour FISH analysis, PathVysion (ABBOTT) fluorescence ISH (FISH)

in a single centre to provide standardised methodology and assessment. HER2 was classed as amplified when the HER2/CEP 17 ratio was two or greater in accordance with UK guidelines. All cases which showed discordance between IHC and FISH were re-tested with each of the HER2 IHC platforms to discover whether these are truly discordant results or if the discrepancy is a consequence of the choice of antibody.

Results: 16/600 (2.8%) unequivocal HER2 gene amplification (mean ratio >2.0) whilst 8/600 (1.2%) had borderline amplification status(mean ratio = or <2.0). The overall assay specific discordance rates were 3.0% (HercepTest), 2.5% (4B5) and 3.0% (Oracle), respectively.

Conclusion: The observed level of discordance is well within the range of discordance rates reported by previous studies. The discrepancies could be due to inadequate quality fixation and/or inadequate sensitivity of the assay platforms used, or under scoring. A detailed analysis of possible assay related source of discrepancy is currently underway by repeating the analyses of the 24 discordant cases using like for like three assay platforms at an independent expert centre.

Citation Format: Bharat Jasani, Fiona Campbell, Phillapa Jones, Jane Gilbert, James Dowd, Keith Miller, Merdol Ibrahim, Ian Ellis, Emma Hurley, Mary Falzon, Barrett-Lee Peter, Jane Starczynski. Audit of the accuracy of immunohistochemical (IHC) testing of HER2 negative status of breast cancer in the United Kingdom [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-10-03.

Previous
Back to top
Cancer Research: 75 (9 Supplement)
May 2015
Volume 75, Issue 9 Supplement
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by Author

Sign up for alerts

Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Cancer Research article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Abstract P5-10-03: Audit of the accuracy of immunohistochemical (IHC) testing of HER2 negative status of breast cancer in the United Kingdom
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Cancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Cancer Research.
Citation Tools
Abstract P5-10-03: Audit of the accuracy of immunohistochemical (IHC) testing of HER2 negative status of breast cancer in the United Kingdom
Bharat Jasani, Fiona Campbell, Phillapa Jones, Jane Gilbert, James Dowd, Keith Miller, Merdol Ibrahim, Ian Ellis, Emma Hurley, Mary Falzon, Barrett-Lee Peter and Jane Starczynski
Cancer Res May 1 2015 (75) (9 Supplement) P5-10-03; DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.SABCS14-P5-10-03

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Abstract P5-10-03: Audit of the accuracy of immunohistochemical (IHC) testing of HER2 negative status of breast cancer in the United Kingdom
Bharat Jasani, Fiona Campbell, Phillapa Jones, Jane Gilbert, James Dowd, Keith Miller, Merdol Ibrahim, Ian Ellis, Emma Hurley, Mary Falzon, Barrett-Lee Peter and Jane Starczynski
Cancer Res May 1 2015 (75) (9 Supplement) P5-10-03; DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.SABCS14-P5-10-03
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Poster Session Abstracts

  • Abstract P6-14-05: Phase 2 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of eribulin mesylate administered biweekly for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer
  • Abstract P6-08-07: Decline in compliance to breast cancer screening in France: Results of the 5th EDIFICE survey
  • Abstract P6-08-04: National trends in mastectomy for operable breast cancers treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy
Show more 3

Poster Session 5: Prognostic and Predictive Factors: Prognostic Factors and Biomarkers - Methods

  • Abstract P5-10-01: Clinical relevance of TP53 mutations and genomic instability in node positive breast cancer
  • Abstract P5-10-09: Correlation between germline and tumor CYP450 2D6 gene polymorphisms
Show more 3
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
Facebook  Twitter  LinkedIn  YouTube  RSS

Articles

  • Online First
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Meeting Abstracts

Info for

  • Authors
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers
  • Librarians
  • Reviewers

About Cancer Research

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Permissions
  • Submit a Manuscript
AACR logo

Copyright © 2018 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Cancer Research Online ISSN: 1538-7445
Cancer Research Print ISSN: 0008-5472
Journal of Cancer Research ISSN: 0099-7013
American Journal of Cancer ISSN: 0099-7374

Advertisement