Assessing the discordance rate between local and central HER2 testing in women with locally determined HER2-negative breast cancer.

MedStar author(s):
Citation: Cancer. 120(17):2657-64, 2014 Sep 1.PMID: 24930388Institution: Washington Cancer InstituteForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Comparative Study | Journal Article | Multicenter Study | Observational Study | Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tSubject headings: *Breast Neoplasms/me [Metabolism] | *Receptor, erbB-2/me [Metabolism] | *Tumor Markers, Biological/me [Metabolism] | Breast Neoplasms/di [Diagnosis] | Breast Neoplasms/ge [Genetics] | False Negative Reactions | Female | Humans | Immunohistochemistry | In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence | Middle Aged | Prospective Studies | Receptor, erbB-2/ge [Genetics] | Sensitivity and Specificity | Tumor Markers, Biological/ge [Genetics]Year: 2014Local holdings: Available online from the MWHC library: 1948 - present, Available in print through MWHC library: 1999 - 2006ISSN:
  • 0008-543X
Name of journal: CancerAbstract: BACKGROUND: The importance of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) as a prognostic and predictive marker in invasive breast cancer is well established. Accurate assessment of HER2 status is essential to determine optimal treatment options.CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the limitations of employing just one HER2 testing methodology in current clinical practice. It identifies a cohort of patients who did not receive potentially efficacious therapy because their tumor HER2-positivity was not determined by the test initially used. Because of inherent limitations in testing methodologies, it is inadvisable to rely on a single test to rule out potential benefit from HER2-targeted therapy. 2014 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.METHODS: Breast cancer tumor tissue samples from the VIRGO observational cohort tissue substudy that were locally HER2-negative were retested centrally with both US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assays, using FDA-approved assay cutoffs; results were compared.RESULTS: Of the 552 unique patient samples centrally retested with local HER2-negative results recorded, tumor samples from 22 (4.0%) patients were determined to be HER2-positive (95% confidence interval [CI]=2.5%-5.7%). Of these, 18 had been tested locally by only one testing methodology; 15 of 18 were HER2-positive after the central retesting, based on the testing methodology not performed locally. Compared with the 530 patients with centrally confirmed HER2-negative tumors, the 22 patients with centrally determined HER2-positive tumors were younger (median age 56.5 versus 60.0 years) and more likely to have ER/PR-negative tumors (27.3% versus 22.3%). These patients also had shorter median progression-free survival (6.4 months [95% CI=3.8-15.9 months] versus 9.1 months [95% CI=8.3-10.3 months]) and overall survival (25.9 months [95% CI=13.8-not estimable] versus 27.9 months [95% CI=25.0-32.9 months]).All authors: Bloom KJ, Brammer MG, Burris H, Chau M, Gralow JR, Kaufman PA, Lalla D, Mayer M, Pegram M, Rugo HS, Swain SM, Vogel CL, Yardley DA, Yoo BFiscal year: FY2015Digital Object Identifier: Date added to catalog: 2014-11-11
Holdings
Item type Current library Collection Call number Status Date due Barcode
Journal Article MedStar Authors Catalog Article 24930388 Available 24930388

Available online from the MWHC library: 1948 - present, Available in print through MWHC library: 1999 - 2006

BACKGROUND: The importance of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) as a prognostic and predictive marker in invasive breast cancer is well established. Accurate assessment of HER2 status is essential to determine optimal treatment options.

CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the limitations of employing just one HER2 testing methodology in current clinical practice. It identifies a cohort of patients who did not receive potentially efficacious therapy because their tumor HER2-positivity was not determined by the test initially used. Because of inherent limitations in testing methodologies, it is inadvisable to rely on a single test to rule out potential benefit from HER2-targeted therapy. 2014 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.

METHODS: Breast cancer tumor tissue samples from the VIRGO observational cohort tissue substudy that were locally HER2-negative were retested centrally with both US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assays, using FDA-approved assay cutoffs; results were compared.

RESULTS: Of the 552 unique patient samples centrally retested with local HER2-negative results recorded, tumor samples from 22 (4.0%) patients were determined to be HER2-positive (95% confidence interval [CI]=2.5%-5.7%). Of these, 18 had been tested locally by only one testing methodology; 15 of 18 were HER2-positive after the central retesting, based on the testing methodology not performed locally. Compared with the 530 patients with centrally confirmed HER2-negative tumors, the 22 patients with centrally determined HER2-positive tumors were younger (median age 56.5 versus 60.0 years) and more likely to have ER/PR-negative tumors (27.3% versus 22.3%). These patients also had shorter median progression-free survival (6.4 months [95% CI=3.8-15.9 months] versus 9.1 months [95% CI=8.3-10.3 months]) and overall survival (25.9 months [95% CI=13.8-not estimable] versus 27.9 months [95% CI=25.0-32.9 months]).

English

Powered by Koha