Breast Neoplasms: Yaziji H

Yaziji H, Taylor CR, Goldstein NS, Dabbs DJ, Hammond EH, Hewlett B, Floyd AD, Barry TS, Martin AW, Badve S, Baehner F, Cartun RW, Eisen RN, Swanson PE, Hewitt SM, Vyberg M, Hicks DG, Anonymous00020. · Vitro Molecular Laboratories, Miami, FL daggerKeck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA. · Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. · Pubmed #18931614 No free full text.

Abstract: Estrogen receptor (ER) status in breast cancer is currently the most important predictive biomarker that determines breast cancer prognosis after treatment with endocrine therapy. Although immunohistochemistry has been widely viewed as the gold standard methodology for ER testing in breast cancer, lack of standardized procedures, and lack of regulatory adherence to testing guidelines has resulted in high rates of "false-negative" results worldwide. Standardized testing is only possible after all aspects of ER testing--preanalytical, analytical, and postanalytical, have been closely controlled. A meeting of the "ad-hoc committee" of expert pathologists, technologists, and scientists, representing academic centers, reference laboratories, and various agencies, issued standardization testing recommendations, aimed at optimization of clinical ER testing environment, as a step toward improved standardized testing.

Yaziji H, Taylor CR. · No affiliation provided · Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. · Pubmed #17721265 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Yaziji H, Gown AM. · No affiliation provided · Hum Pathol. · Pubmed #14991529 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Yaziji H, Gown AM. · PhenoPath Laboratories, 551 North 34th Street, Suite 100, Seattle, WA 98103, USA. · Adv Anat Pathol. · Pubmed #12409642 No free full text.

Abstract: Testing for alterations in HER-2/neu in breast cancer has become increasingly popular in recent years, particularly with the recent development of a humanized antiHER-2/neu monoclonal antibody, trastuzumab, which is currently being employed in conjunction with cytotoxic chemotherapy to treat metastatic breast cancer in patients whose tumors exhibit this HER-2/neu alteration. Controversy exists not only on the optimal method of laboratory testing for this HER-2/neu alteration (i.e., fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) versus immunohistochemistry (IHC) versus others), but also on the type of reagents used for a given method. A plethora of published studies on tissue-based HER-2/neu testing has recently appeared in many peer-reviewed journals; many have concluded that IHC could be used as a first-line screening test, with the recommendation of FISH to confirm indeterminate results. In contrast to these studies, a recent study by Pauletti et al. showed that HER-2/neu testing by IHC does not predict clinical outcome as accurately as does FISH. This commentary discusses the findings of this study, within a broader review of critical issues relating to HER-2/neu testing in breast cancer.

Yaziji H, Gown AM, Sneige N. · PhenoPath Laboratories, Seattle, Washington, USA. · Adv Anat Pathol. · Pubmed #10721417 No free full text.

Abstract: Breast cancer can only be life threatening when it becomes invasive, at which point it carries potential for spreading and metastasis. Therefore, it is critical to distinguish invasive carcinomas (IC) from noninvasive lesions, the latter including ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and benign breast lesions. While this distinction is usually made based on histologic evaluation alone, in a small but significant number of cases, accurate diagnosis may be impossible, particularly in the context of core needle biopsies. To this end, a number of immunohistochemical markers have been utilized to help establish the presence (or absence) of stromal invasion. The fact that the loss of the myoepithelial cell (MEC) layer is a hallmark of IC (but not DCIS) suggests the use of antibodies to MEC to distinguish IC from DCIS. However, these markers have a wide range of specificity and sensitivity, with the potential for problems in interpretation. The use of many of these markers is limited by high rates of 'false positive' or 'false negative' immunostaining. In this review, the biology of stromal invasion in breast carcinomas will be discussed, as well as the various myoepithelial markers, with emphasis on pitfalls related to their sensitivity and specificity in the detection of MECs in the breast. Finally, the authors will discuss diagnostically challenging breast lesions, which may require the use of MEC marker studies to reach a definitive diagnosis.

Yaziji H, Battifora H, Barry TS, Hwang HC, Bacchi CE, McIntosh MW, Kussick SJ, Gown AM. · Ancillary Pathways, Miami, FL 33243-0777, USA. · Mod Pathol. · Pubmed #16554731 links to  free full text

Abstract: We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of 10 monoclonal and two polyclonal antibodies for distinguishing epithelioid mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma (AdCA) using immunohistochemistry (IHC). The antibodies were directed against the mesothelial-associated antigens mesothelin, calretinin, cytokeratin 5, thrombomodulin, Wilms' tumor-1 (WT-1) gene product and HBME-1, and the nonmesothelial antigens Lewis-Y blood group (antibody BG8), MOC-31, BerEp4, CD15, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) family. The 133 tumors evaluated included 65 malignant epithelioid mesotheliomas, 22 lung AdCAs, 27 ovarian serous carcinomas, 24 breast carcinomas, and five gastric carcinomas. Diagnoses were based on clinical, histologic, ultrastructural, and/or IHC findings. Calretinin had the best sensitivity for mesothelioma (95%), followed by HBME-1 (84%), WT-1 (78%), cytokeratin 5 (76%), mesothelin (75%), and vimentin and thrombomodulin (68%). Thrombomodulin had the best specificity for mesothelioma (92%), followed by cytokeratin 5 (89%), calretinin (87%) vimentin (84%), and HBME-1 (45%). When ovarian carcinomas were excluded from the analysis, the specificity of mesothelin and WT-1 for the diagnosis of mesothelioma increased to 90 and 81%, respectively. The sensitivity of the nonmesothelial antigens for AdCA was organ dependent, with BG8 performing best in the breast cancer group (96%), and BerEp4, BG8, MOC-31 performing best in the lung cancer group (100%). The specificity of the nonmesothelial antigens for AdCA was 98% for BG8 and CEA, 97% for CD15, 95% for BerEp4, and 87% for MOC-31. A novel statistical analysis technique employing logic regression analysis identified a three-antibody immunohistochemical panel including calretinin, BG8, and MOC-31, which provided over 96% sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing epithelioid mesothelioma from AdCA.

Hwang H, Quenneville L, Yaziji H, Gown AM. · PhenoPath Laboratories, 551 N. 34th Street, Seattle, WA 98103, USA. · Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. · Pubmed #15354736 No free full text.

Abstract: Carcinomas of ovarian surface epithelial origin can arise from, and often present at, extraovarian sites. There are few available markers for the positive identification of carcinomas of ovarian surface epithelial origin, which might aid in distinguishing them from metastatic carcinomas, such as of breast, colon, or lung origin. Recently, the Wilms tumor gene product (WT-1) has been shown to be expressed in ovarian surface and mesothelial epithelium. We tested the hypothesis that WT-1 would be a sensitive and specific marker of ovarian surface epithelium carcinomas. An archived series of 116 ovarian carcinomas (57 serous [43 ovarian, 14 extraovarian], 31 mucinous, 15 clear cell, 13 endometrioid), 118 breast carcinomas, 46 colonic carcinomas, and 45 nonsmall cell lung cancers were selected. A polyclonal antibody to the WT-1 gene product was applied to deparaffinized, formalin-fixed tissue sections after epitope retrieval. Fifty-two of 57 (93%) serous carcinomas of ovarian surface epithelial origin were WT-1-positive, in a nuclear pattern, with virtually all the tumor cell population positive in the majority of cases. None of the mucinous, clear cell, or endometrioid ovarian cancers were positive, and only 8 of 118 breast, 0 of 46 colonic, and 0 of 45 lung nonsmall cell carcinomas were WT-1-positive. These findings demonstrate that WT-1 is a highly sensitive and specific marker of serous carcinomas of ovarian surface epithelial origin (both ovarian and extraovarian). These results also contradict recent reports demonstrating WT-1 expression in both breast and lung carcinomas.

Yaziji H, Goldstein LC, Barry TS, Werling R, Hwang H, Ellis GK, Gralow JR, Livingston RB, Gown AM. · PhenoPath Laboratories, Seattle, Wash 98103, USA. · JAMA. · Pubmed #15113815 links to  free full text

Abstract: CONTEXT: Testing for HER-2 oncogene in breast cancer has increased because of its role as a prognostic and predictive factor. Some advocate gene testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) vs protein testing by immunohistochemistry as the method which most accurately evaluates and predicts response to the anti-HER-2 antibody, trastuzumab. However, critical examination of FISH on a screening basis has yet to be performed. OBJECTIVES: To determine the correlation between FISH and immunohistochemistry results by determining HER-2/neu gene status on tumor sections with indeterminate immunohistochemistry results (2+ score), confirm gene amplification on tumor sections with positive results (3+ score), and verify gene status on tumor sections with negative results (0 or 1+ score). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: A quality control and quality assurance program for HER-2 testing by FISH, which used tumor specimens from 2963 patients (median age, 56 years) with breast cancer received from 135 hospitals and cancer centers in 29 states, was performed at a reference laboratory from January 1, 1999, to May 15, 2003. Every specimen evaluated by FISH was parallel tested with immunohistochemistry tests. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: With FISH as the presumed standard testing method, the positive and negative predictive values and sensitivity and specificity of immunohistochemistry were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 3260 clinical HER-2 tests by FISH were performed on 2963 serially referred breast cancer specimens. Of these, 2933 tests were successful and 2913 breast cancer specimens had both FISH and immunohistochemistry results available. With FISH as the standard testing method, the positive predictive value of positive immunohistochemistry score (3+) was 91.6%, and the negative predictive value of negative immunohistochemistry score (0 or 1+) was 97.2%. The sensitivity of immunohistochemistry tests, including tumor sections with scores of 2+ or 3+, was 92.6% and the specificity of immunohistochemistry tests with scores of 3+ was 98.8%. The FISH test had a significantly higher failure rate (5% vs 0.08%) and reagent cost (140 dollars vs 10 dollars), and longer testing (36 hours vs 4 hours) and interpretation times (7 minutes vs 45 seconds) vs immunohistochemistry tests. CONCLUSIONS: A testing algorithm for HER-2 determination is most efficient by using immunohistochemistry as the method of choice, with FISH performed for cancers with indeterminate results (2+ score). Successful quality control and quality assurance programs are a prerequisite for such approaches.

Werling RW, Yaziji H, Bacchi CE, Gown AM. · PhenoPath Laboratories and IRIS, 551 N. 34th Street, Seattle, WA 98103, USA. · Am J Surg Pathol. · Pubmed #12604886 No free full text.

Abstract: CDX2 is a recently cloned homeobox gene that encodes an intestine-specific transcription factor, expressed in the nuclei of epithelial cells throughout the intestine, from duodenum to rectum. While expression of CDX2 protein in primary and metastatic colorectal carcinomas has been previously documented, neither the sensitivity nor the specificity of CDX2 expression, as determined by immunohistochemistry, for colorectal adenocarcinoma has been determined. We performed an immunohistochemical survey of 476 tumors with a monoclonal antibody, CDX2-88, including 89 tumors from the colon and duodenum and 95 tumors from other gastrointestinal sites, including the esophagus, stomach, pancreatobiliary system, gastrointestinal carcinoids, and liver. CDX2 was expressed uniformly (that is, in 76-100% of tumor cells) in all but one of the evaluated colorectal and duodenal tumors. High-level expression of CDX2 was also found, however, in mucinous ovarian carcinomas and adenocarcinomas primary to the urinary bladder of which 64% and 100% were positive, respectively. Gastric, gastroesophageal, and pancreatic adenocarcinomas and cholangiocarcinomas all showed similar, heterogeneous patterns of CDX2 expression. Most tumors in each group showed CDX2 expression by a minority of cells, whereas a substantial minority of cases in each group was completely negative and a smaller minority was uniformly positive. Gastrointestinal carcinoids gave similarly varied results, but the majority (58%) was negative. Hepatocellular carcinomas showed no expression of CDX2. Only very rare examples of carcinomas of the genitourinary and gynecologic tracts, breast, lung, and head and neck showed significant levels of CDX2 expression. In this study of primary and metastatic epithelial tumors, uniform CDX2 expression is demonstrated to be an exquisitely sensitive and highly, but incompletely, specific marker of intestinal adenocarcinomas. Compared with villin, a previously described marker of GI adenocarcinomas, CDX2 demonstrated superior sensitivity and comparable specificity. CDX2 expression can be seen, however, in selected non-GI adenocarcinomas such as mucinous ovarian carcinomas and adenocarcinomas of the urinary bladder.

Werling RW, Hwang H, Yaziji H, Gown AM. · PhenoPath Laboratories, Seattle, Washington, 98103, USA. · Am J Surg Pathol. · Pubmed #12502930 No free full text.

Abstract: Identification of myoepithelial cells using antibodies to cytoskeletal proteins, such as smooth muscle myosin heavy chain (SMM-HC) and calponin, can play an important role in distinguishing invasive carcinoma from its histologic mimics. However, antibodies to these proteins may also cross-react with stromal myofibroblasts and vascular smooth muscle cells. It has recently been demonstrated that myoepithelial cells express the nuclear protein, p63, a member of the p53 gene family. We compared the patterns of reactivity of antibodies with p63, calponin, and SMM-HC on 85 breast lesions, including 11 cases of sclerosing adenosis, 33 cases of ductal carcinoma in situ, including 10 that showed microinvasion, 6 cases of lobular carcinoma in situ, and 35 cases of infiltrating ductal carcinoma. All three antibodies were positive on the vast majority of myoepithelial cells in all cases. A small minority of cases showed focal gaps in the revealed myoepithelial cell layer, reflected in discontinuous positive immunostaining around noninvasive epithelial nests (including ductal carcinoma in situ). No case showed p63 expression by myofibroblasts or vascular smooth muscle cells, whereas myofibroblasts expressed, in 8% and 76% of cases, SMM-HC and calponin, respectively. Although no tumor cell reactivity was noted with antibodies to calponin or SMM-HC, tumor cells in 11% of cases showed at least focal p63 expression. And although antibodies to p63 offer excellent sensitivity and increased specificity for myoepithelial detection relative to antibodies to calponin and SMM-HC, they have the following diagnostic limitations: 1) they occasionally demonstrate an apparently discontinuous myoepithelial layer, particularly around ductal carcinoma in situ, and 2) they react with a small but significant subset of breast carcinoma tumor cells. p63 may represent a myoepithelial marker that can complement or replace SMM-HC and/or calponin in the analysis of difficult breast lesions.

Yaziji H, Gown AM. · No affiliation provided · MLO Med Lab Obs. · Pubmed #12090214 No free full text.

Abstract: While it is tempting to think of the results of laboratory tests as quantitative, reproducible and accurate, many tests in fact have embedded variables that could lead to inconsistency and sometimes false reporting of results. Tissue-based testing of HER-2/neu in breast cancer represents an example of the latter. This article discusses the available technologies for HER-2/neu testing with some of the sources of testing errors.

Sneige N, Yaziji H, Mandavilli SR, Perez ER, Ordonez NG, Gown AM, Ayala A. · Department of Pathology, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA. · Am J Surg Pathol. · Pubmed #11474284 No free full text.

Abstract: Spindle cell carcinoma of the breast, a variant of metaplastic carcinoma, includes a wide spectrum of lesions with histomorphologic and nuclear features ranging from overtly malignant to mildly atypical. Spindle cell carcinomas with mildly atypical features may resemble fasciitis, fibromatosis, or myofibroblastic tumors and therefore are often misinterpreted as such. A recent study has suggested that spindle cell carcinomas with a dominant fibromatosis-like phenotype, unlike spindle cell carcinomas in general, have no propensity for distant metastasis and should be termed "tumors" rather than "carcinomas." To investigate the question of fibromatosis-like spindle cell breast carcinoma (FLSpCCs) metastatic potential, we studied cases of FLSpCC seen at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center between 1987 and 2000. Clinical, pathologic, and immunophenotypic features were reviewed, with emphasis on biologic behavior and predictors of clinical outcome. Our series included 24 women who ranged in age from 55 to 85 years (mean 66 years). Tumor size ranged from 1.0 to 5 cm (mean 2.8 cm). Most tumors were grossly well defined but had microscopic infiltrative borders. Tumors showed a dominant fibromatosis-like or myofibroblastic-like growth pattern with prominent collagenization. Inflammatory infiltrate was noted in the majority of tumors. Cytokeratin-positive cells were seen in all cases and usually appeared as cords or sheets of polygonal cells; isolated cytokeratin-positive cells were rare. In most tumors immunoreactivity for smooth muscle actin (SMA) was confined to the cytokeratin-negative cells. In five cases intense co-expression of cytokeratin and SMA was noted. None of the tumors showed immunoreactivity for smooth muscle heavy chain myosin, estrogen receptors, progesterone receptors, or HER-2/neu. Ki-67 expression was noted in fewer than 5% of tumor cells. Treatment consisted of local excision (seven cases) or modified radical mastectomy (13 cases). Treatment was unknown in four cases. In patients who underwent axillary nodal dissection, no lymph node metastases were found. Two of the six patients who underwent local excision developed local recurrence. Two patients who underwent modified radical mastectomy developed lung metastases within 2 years after the initial diagnosis. The metastatic tumors were histologically similar to the primary tumors. Our findings indicate that FLSpCCs have the potential for local recurrence and distant metastasis and should be treated accordingly. Because FLSpCCs may be underdiagnosed as benign, the use of immunohistochemical studies, especially for cytokeratins and SMA, is essential in the evaluation of any spindle cell proliferations of the breast.

Lehr HA, Jacobs TW, Yaziji H, Schnitt SJ, Gown AM. · Institute of Pathology, University of Mainz, Medical Center, Langenbeckstrasse 1, D-55101 Mainz, Germany. · Am J Clin Pathol. · Pubmed #11392876 links to  free full text

Abstract: We correlated quantitative results obtained in 40 invasive breast cancer cases for HER-2 gene amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization with protein expression by immunohistochemical studies with computer-assisted image analysis. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) results were quantified as the mean number of fluorescent signals per nucleus, and immunohistochemical slides were read by semiquantitatively assessing membranous immunostaining intensity in tumor cells vs nonneoplastic breast tissue or quantitatively evaluated by image analysis. We found high correlation between immunohistochemical results by semiquantitative scoring and by image analysis. FISH results correlated with immunohistochemical results moderately when the staining intensity of only tumor cells was assessed and significantly better when the difference in staining intensity between tumor cells and nonneoplastic breast tissue was assessed. The correlation with FISH results was further improved when immunohistochemical study was combined with heat-induced epitope retrieval (HIER). Although FISH and immunohistochemical studies assess different aspects of the HER-2/neu gene (amplification vs overexpression), we found good correlation between the diagnostic techniques. The correlation was best when immunohistochemical studies were combined with HIER and assessed as the difference between tumor cells and nonneoplastic breast tissue.

Goldstein NS, Bassi D, Watts JC, Layfield LJ, Yaziji H, Gown AM. · Dept of Anatomic Pathology, William Beaumont Hospital, 3601 W Thirteen Mile Rd, Royal Oak, MI 48073, USA. · Am J Clin Pathol. · Pubmed #11293901 links to  free full text

Abstract: Studies suggest that E-cadherin is useful to classify epithelial breast lesions as ductal or lobular, but extensive experience with this antibody is lacking. We studied reactivity of lesions with classic and indeterminate morphologic features. We reviewed 95 lesions and divided them into unanimous and nonunanimous diagnosis groups; the unanimous group served as benchmark lesions to which E-cadherin reactivity could be standardized and compared. All 37 ductal lesions in the unanimous group had strong, diffuse E-cadherin reactivity. Two of 22 classic lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) lesions had sparse E-cadherin-reactive lobular cells within a few terminal duct lobular units. Neither displayed transition from nonreactive to reactive cells. Of 36 lesions in the nonunanimous group, 19 had insufficient morphologic features for definitive classification. Only 6 of 19 were E-cadherin reactive, including several minimally proliferative lesions. The other 17 lesions in the nonunanimous group had LCIS and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) features. All had no E-cadherin, or strong membrane reactivity of constituent cells in varying proportions, without a transition between reactive and nonreactive cells. Results suggest that the majority of morphologically nondiagnostic atypical lesions are lobular, including those associated with DCIS. E-cadherin seems to be absent in most lobular lesions.

Lehr HA, Folpe A, Yaziji H, Kommoss F, Gown AM. · Institute of Pathology, University of Mainz, Germany. · Am J Clin Pathol. · Pubmed #10941333 links to  free full text

Abstract: Immunohistochemistry using antibodies to cytokeratin 8 can serve as a valuable diagnostic tool for the differentiation of lobular from ductal carcinomas of the breast. In contrast with ductal carcinomas, which exhibit a peripheral-predominant immunostaining pattern, adjacent tumor cells "molding" to each other, lobular carcinomas exhibit a ring-like perinuclear immunostaining pattern, creating a "bag of marbles" appearance with neighboring tumor cells. This immunostaining pattern is stable even in the tumors that otherwise do not exhibit characteristic histomorphologic features (i.e., solid or pleomorphic type of a lobular carcinoma) and tumors that mimic growth patterns characteristic of the respective other tumor type (i.e., targetoid or single-file growth pattern in a ductal carcinoma). Furthermore, we demonstrate that ductal carcinomas express E-cadherin in a similar peripheral-predominant immunostaining pattern (33/33 cases), while all 15 lobular carcinomas were negative for E-cadherin, suggesting a role for E-cadherin in the architectural organization of the cytoskeletal scaffolding within the tumor cells.

Jacobs TW, Gown AM, Yaziji H, Barnes MJ, Schnitt SJ. · Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA 02215, USA. · Am J Clin Pathol. · Pubmed #10664627 links to  free full text

Abstract: Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is used commonly for evaluating HER-2/neu protein expression in breast cancer. Given the potential clinical importance of HER-2/neu status in patient management, interlaboratory variability in HER-2/neu IHC results in a matter of legitimate concern. We compared the results from 2 laboratories for HER-2/neu determined by IHC on paraffin sections of the same 100 consecutive invasive breast cancers. Both laboratories used the same primary antibody; however, different methods for heat-induced epitope retrieval (microwave or steam) and immunostaining (automated equipment from different manufacturers) and different scoring systems (positive-negative and 0-4+) were used. Slides were read in a blinded fashion and the results from the 2 laboratories were compared. Of the 93 cases evaluable in both laboratories, 24% were scored as HER-2/neu-positive at 1 laboratory, and 23% were scored as positive at the other. Complete concordance in categorization of HER-2/neu status between the 2 laboratories was achieved in 90 of 93 cases. Excellent interlaboratory agreement for HER-2/neu IHC was attained using the same primary antibody to HER-2/neu, even without standardization of assay method or scoring criteria. However, standardization of these parameters remains an important objective to optimize interlaboratory agreement.

Jacobs TW, Gown AM, Yaziji H, Barnes MJ, Schnitt SJ. · Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA. · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #10561248 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: To evaluate the specificity of the HercepTest for Immunoenzymatic Staining (Dako Corp, Carpinteria, CA) for determining HER-2/neu protein expression in breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight invasive breast cancers previously found to be HER-2/neu-negative by two different immunohistochemical (IHC) assays and not amplified for the HER-2/neu gene by fluorescence in situ hybridization were studied using the HercepTest kit. HercepTest was performed according to the manufacturer's guidelines, and the results were scored on a 0 to 3+ scale using the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved grading system. In this system, cases scored as 2+ or 3+ are considered HER-2/neu-positive. RESULTS: Among these 48 cases, the IHC score using the FDA-approved scoring system was 0 in four cases (8.3%), 1+ in 16 (33.3%), 2+ in 21 (43.8%), and 3+ in seven (14.6%). Therefore, 58.4% of these cases were categorized as HER-2/neu-positive, and the specificity of the HercepTest kit for HER-2/neu expression was 41.6%. However, with the use of a modified scoring system that took into account the level of staining of nonneoplastic epithelium, the specificity increased to 93.2%. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the HercepTest kit, when used in accordance with the manufacturer's guidelines and the FDA-approved scoring system, results in a large proportion of breast cancers being categorized as positive for HER-2/neu protein expression and that many of these seem to be false-positives. Consideration of the level of staining of nonneoplastic epithelium resulted in improved specificity. The current FDA-approved scoring system for HercepTest results should be reevaluated before its widespread use in clinical practice.

Jacobs TW, Gown AM, Yaziji H, Barnes MJ, Schnitt SJ. · Department of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02215, USA. · J Clin Oncol. · Pubmed #10561247 No free full text.

Abstract: PURPOSE: To compare fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) in the determination of HER-2/neu status of breast cancers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: FISH and IHC for HER-2/neu were performed on formalin-fixed paraffin sections of 100 consecutive invasive breast cancers. FISH was performed at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, using the Oncor/Ventana INFORM kit (Ventana Medical Systems, Tucson, AZ; formerly sold by Oncor, Inc, Gaithersburg, MD) in a laboratory certified as proficient in this procedure. IHC was performed at PhenoPath Laboratories, Seattle, WA, using a polyclonal antibody to the HER-2/neu protein. FISH and IHC were analyzed in a blinded fashion, and the results were then compared. Procedure and interpretation times and reagent costs for FISH and IHC were also compared. RESULTS: HER-2/neu was amplified by FISH in 26% of cases, and 23% were HER-2/neu-positive by IHC. FISH and IHC were both assessable in 90 cases. Concordance between FISH and IHC results was seen in 82 of these cases (91%, P <.001). The FISH procedure required more technologist time and more interpretation time per case for the pathologist than IHC. Reagent costs were substantially higher for FISH than for IHC. CONCLUSION: There is a high level of correlation between FISH and IHC in the evaluation of HER-2/neu status of breast cancers using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens. Although the choice of which assay to use should be left for individual laboratories to make based on technical and economic considerations, our results may make it difficult to justify the routine use of FISH for determination of HER-2/neu status in breast cancer.