Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
5-Year IF – 2.0, IF – 1.9, JCI (2024) – 0.43
Scopus CiteScore – 4.3
Q1 in SJR 2024, SJR score – 0.598, H-index: 49 (SJR)
ICV – 161.00; MNiSW – 70 pts
Initial editorial assessment and first decision within 24 h

ISSN 1899–5276 (print), ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2013, vol. 22, nr 1, January-February, p. 27–31

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Discrepancies Between HER2 Assessment from Core Needle Biopsies and Surgical Specimens of Invasive Ductal Breast Carcinoma

Niezgodność oceny receptora HER2 w materiale z biopsji gruboigłowej oraz materiału operacyjnego raka przewodowego gruczołu piersiowego

Andrzej Wojnar1,A,B,C,D,F, Bartosz Puła2,A,B,C,D,F, Marzena Podhorska-Okołów2,A,C,D,E,F, Piotr Dzięgiel2,3,A,C,D,E,F

1 Lower Silesian Oncology Center, Wrocław, Poland

2 Department of Histology and Embryology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland

3 Department of Physiotherapy, Wroclaw University School of Physical Education, Wrocław, Poland

Abstract

Background. The assessment of HER2 status is particularly important for qualifying patients for trastuzumab treatment of invasive ductal breast carcinoma (IDC). HER2 assessment in core needle biopsies (CNBs) of IDC could contribute to a better therapy schedule.
Objectives. The study aimed at examining the relationship between HER2 immunohistochemistry assessment scores in paired CNBs and whole tissue sections of IDC.
Material and Methods. The study was performed on paired samples of CNBs and whole tissue sections from 49 IDC patients operated on at the Lower Silesian Oncology Center in Wrocław, Poland.
Results. Discrepancies in HER2 scores were noted in eleven (22.45%) of the paired samples analyzed. Three cases (6.12%) were underscored in the CNB specimens as compared to the surgical HER2 specimens, whereas eight cases (16.33%) were overscored in the CNB specimens.
Conclusion. Based on the high level of discrepancy between the tested pairs of IDC tissues, the authors recommend caution in assessing HER2 in CNB tissue specimens as a standard procedure. Wherever possible whole tissue sections should be utilized for HER2 assessment.

Streszczenie

Wprowadzenie.Ocena ekspresji receptora HER2 jest ważnym elementem kwalifikacji pacjentek chorych na raka przewodowu gruczołu piersiowego (IDC) do terapii trastuzumabem. Ocena receptora HER2 w materiale z biopsji gruboigłowej (CNB) guzów IDC mogłaby przyczynić się do lepszego planowania terapii przeciwnowotworowej.
Cel pracy. Zbadanie zależności między oceną ekspresji receptora HER2 w materiale IDC z biopsji gruboigłowej oraz tkankach pobranych operacyjnie.
Materiał i metody. Badanie przeprowadzono na parach tkanek IDC pobranych metodą biopsji gruboigłowej oraz operacyjnie od 49 pacjentek operowanych w Dolnośląskim Centrum Onkologii.
Wyniki. Zanotowano rozbieżność w ocenie ekspresji receptora HER2 w jedenastu (22,25%) spośród analizowanych par przypadków. Trzy (6,12%) przypadki miały niedoszacowaną ocenę, a osiem (16,33%) było przeszacowanych w materiale CNB w porównaniu z klasycznymi próbkami HER2.
Wnioski. Na podstawie uzyskanych wyników oraz dużej rozbieżności między badanymi parami tkanek autorzy zalecają ostrożność w ocenie receptora HER2 w materiale CNB w standardowym postępowaniu w przypadku możliwości użycia do oceny preparatów HER2 przygotowanych z materiału operacyjnego.

Key words

breast cancer, HER2, needle core biopsy.

Słowa kluczowe

rak gruczołu piersiowego, HER2, biopsja gruboigłowa.

References (32)

  1. Ferlay J, Autier P, Boniol M, Heanue M, Colombet M, Boyle P: Estimates of the cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2006. Ann Oncol 2007, 18, 581–592.
  2. Pettine S, Place R, Babu S, Williard W, Kim D, Carter P: Stereotactic breast biopsy is accurate, minimally invasive, and cost effective. Am J Surg 1996, 171, 474–476.
  3. Bilous M: Breast core needle biopsy: issues and controversies. Mod Pathol 2010, Suppl 2, 36–45.
  4. Wong AY, Salisbury E, Bilous M: Recent developments in stereotactic breast biopsy methodologies: an update for the surgical pathologist. Adv Anat Pathol 2000, 7, 26–35.
  5. Berner A, Davidson B, Sigstad E, Risberg B: Fine-needle aspiration cytology vs. core biopsy in the diagnosis of breast lesions. Diagn Cytopathol 2003, 29, 344–348.
  6. Kooistra B, Wauters C, Strobbe L: Indeterminate breast fine-needle aspiration: repeat aspiration or core needle biopsy? Ann Surg Oncol 2009, 16, 281–284.
  7. Arnedos M, Nerurkar A, Osin P, A’Hern R, Smith IE, Dowsett M: Discordance between core needle biopsy (CNB) and excisional biopsy (EB) for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR) and HER2 status in early breast cancer (EBC). Ann Oncol 2009, 20, 1948–1952.
  8. Cavaliere A, Sidoni A, Scheibel M, Bellezza G, Brachelente G, Vitali R, Bucciarelli E: Biopathologic profile of breast cancer core biopsy: is it always a valid method? Cancer Lett 2005, 218, 117–121.
  9. Lee AH, Key HP, Bell JA, Hodi Z, Ellis IO: Concordance of HER2 status assessed on needle core biopsy and surgical specimens of invasive carcinoma of the breast. Histopathology 2012, 60, 880–884.
  10. Park SY, Kim KS, Lee TG, Park SS, Kim SM, Han W, Noh DY, Kim SW: The accuracy of preoperative core biopsy in determining histologic grade, hormone receptors, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status in invasive breast cancer. Am J Surg 2009, 197, 266–269.
  11. Sutela A, Vanninen R, Sudah M, Berg M, Kiviniemi V, Rummukainen J, Kataja V, Karja V: Surgical specimen can be replaced by core samples in assessment of ER, PR and HER-2 for invasive breast cancer. Acta Oncol 2008, 47, 38–46.
  12. Usami S, Moriya T, Amari M, Suzuki A, Ishida T, Sasano H, Ohuchi N: Reliability of prognostic factors in breast carcinoma determined by core needle biopsy. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2007, 37, 250–255.
  13. Cahill RA, Walsh D, Landers RJ, Watson RG: Preoperative profiling of symptomatic breast cancer by diagnostic core biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 2006, 13, 45–51.
  14. Mann GB, Fahey VD, Feleppa F, Buchanan MR: Reliance on hormone receptor assays of surgical specimens may compromise outcome in patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23, 5148–5154.
  15. Slamon D, Eiermann W, Robert N, Pienkowski T, Martin M, Press M, Mackey J, Glaspy J, Chan A, Pawlicki M, Pinter T, Valero V, Liu MC, Sauter G, von Minckwitz G, Visco F, Bee V, Buyse M, Bendahmane B, Tabah--Fisch I, Lindsay MA, Riva A, Crown J: Breast Cancer International Research group: Adjuvant trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer. NEJM 2011, 365, 1273–1283.
  16. Valero V, Forbes J, Pegram MD, Pienkowski T, Eiermann W, von Minckwitz G, Roche H, Martin M, Crown J, Mackey JR, Fumoleau P, Rolski J, Mrsic-Krmpotic Z, Jagiello-Gruszfeld A, Riva A, Buyse M, Taupin H, Sauter G, Press MF, Slamon DJ: Multicenter phase III randomized trial comparing docetaxel and trastuzumab with docetaxel, carboplatin, and trastuzumab as first-line chemotherapy for patients with HER2-gene-amplified metastatic breast cancer (BCIRg 007 study): two highly active therapeutic regimens
  17. Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG, Levin WJ, Ullrich A, McGuire WL: Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene. Science 1987, 235, 177–182.
  18. Kallioniemi OP, Kallioniemi A, Kurisu W, Thor A, Chen LC, Smith HS, Waldman FM, Pinkel D, Gray JW: ERBB2 amplification in breast cancer analyzed by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1992, 89, 5321–5325.
  19. Bartlett JM, Starczynski J, Atkey N, Kay E, O’Grady A, Gandy M, Ibrahim M, Jasani B, Ellis IO, Pinder SE, Walker RA: HER2 testing in the UK: recommendations for breast and gastric in-situ hybridisation methods. J Clin Pathol 2011, 64(8), 649–653.
  20. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, Hagerty KL, Allred DC, Cote RJ, Dowsett M, Fitzgibbons PL, Hanna WM, Langer A, McShane LM, Paik S, Pegram MD, Perez EA, Press MF, Rhodes A, Sturgeon C, Taube SE, Tubbs R, Vance GH, van de Vijver M, Wheeler TM, Hayes DF: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007, 131, 18–43.
  21. Carlson RW, Moench SJ, Hammond ME, Perez EA, Burstein HJ, Allred DC, Vogel CL, Goldstein LJ, Somlo G, Gradishar WJ, Hudis CA, Jahanzeb M, Stark A, Wolff AC, Press MF, Winer EP, Paik S, Ljung BM: HER2 testing in breast cancer: NCCN Task Force report and recommendations. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2006, Suppl 3, 1–22.
  22. Umemura S, Osamura RY, Akiyama F, Honma K, Kurosumi M, Sasano H, Toyoshima S, Tsuda H, Ruschoff J, Sakamoto G: What causes discrepancies in HER2 testing for breast cancer? A Japanese ring study in conjunction with the global standard. Am J Clin Pathol 2008, 130, 883–891.
  23. Tsuda H, Kurosumi M, Umemura S, Yamamoto S, Kobayashi T, Osamura RY: HER2 testing on core needle biopsy specimens from primary breast cancers: interobserver reproducibility and concordance with surgically resected specimens. BMC cancer 2010, 10, 534.
  24. Wludarski SC, Lopes LF, Berto ESTR, Carvalho FM, Weiss LM, Bacchi CE: HER2 testing in breast carcinoma: very low concordance rate between reference and local laboratories in Brazil. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2011, 19, 112–118.
  25. Gavrielides MA, Gallas BD, Lenz P, Badano A, Hewitt SM: Observer variability in the interpretation of HER2/ neu immunohistochemical expression with unaided and computer-aided digital microscopy. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2011, 135, 233–242.
  26. Wojnar A, Drozdz K, Podhorska-Okolow M, Pudelko M, Szuba A, Zabel M, Dziegiel P: Differentiated expression of estrogen receptors (ER) and progesterone receptors (PgR) in ductal breast cancers. Folia Histochem Cytobiol 2009, 47, 55–60.
  27. Kobierzycki C, Pula B, Wojnar A, Podhorska-Okolow M, Dziegiel P: Tissue microarray technique in evaluation of proliferative activity in invasive ductal breast cancer. Anticancer Res 2012, 32, 773–777.
  28. Nassar A, Radhakrishnan A, Cabrero IA, Cotsonis GA, Cohen C: Intratumoral heterogeneity of immunohistochemical marker expression in breast carcinoma: a tissue microarray-based study. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2010, 18, 433–441.
  29. Drev P, Grazio SF, Bracko M: Tissue microarrays for routine diagnostic assessment of HER2 status in breast carcinoma. Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2008, 16, 179–184.
  30. Lin Y, Hatem J, Wang J, Quinn A, Hicks D, Tang P: Tissue microarray-based immunohistochemical study can significantly underestimate the expression of HER2 and progesterone receptor in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Biotech Histochem 2011, 86, 345–350.
  31. Tamaki K, Sasano H, Ishida T, Miyashita M, Takeda M, Amari M, Tamaki N, Ohuchi N: Comparison of core needle biopsy (CNB) and surgical specimens for accurate preoperative evaluation of ER, PgR and HER2 status of breast cancer patients. Cancer Sci 2010, 101, 2074–2079.
  32. Dronkers DJ: Stereotaxic core biopsy of breast lesions. Radiology 1992, 183, 631–634.
© Wroclaw Medical University