Abstract
Evaluation of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) immunohistochemistry (IHC) is subject to interobserver variation and lack of reproducibility. Digital image analysis (DIA) has been shown to improve the consistency and accuracy of the evaluation and its use is encouraged in current testing guidelines. We studied whether digital image analysis using a free software application (ImmunoMembrane) can assist in interpreting HER2 IHC in equivocal 2+ cases. We also compared digital photomicrographs with whole-slide images (WSI) as material for ImmunoMembrane DIA. We stained 750 surgical resection specimens of invasive breast cancers immunohistochemically for HER2 and analysed staining with ImmunoMembrane. The ImmunoMembrane DIA scores were compared with the originally responsible pathologists’ visual scores, a researcher’s visual scores and in situ hybridisation (ISH) results. The originally responsible pathologists reported 9.1 % positive 3+ IHC scores, for the researcher this was 8.4 % and for ImmunoMembrane 9.5 %. Equivocal 2+ scores were 34 % for the pathologists, 43.7 % for the researcher and 10.1 % for ImmunoMembrane. Negative 0/1+ scores were 57.6 % for the pathologists, 46.8 % for the researcher and 80.8 % for ImmunoMembrane. There were six false positive cases, which were classified as 3+ by ImmunoMembrane and negative by ISH. Six cases were false negative defined as 0/1+ by IHC and positive by ISH. ImmunoMembrane DIA using digital photomicrographs and WSI showed almost perfect agreement. In conclusion, digital image analysis by ImmunoMembrane can help to resolve a majority of equivocal 2+ cases in HER2 IHC, which reduces the need for ISH testing.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Choritz H, Büsche G, Kreipe H, Study Group HER2 Monitor (2011) Quality assessment of HER2 testing by monitoring of positivity rates. Virchows Arch 459:283–289. doi:10.1007/s00428-011-1132-8
Rydén L, Haglund M, Bendahl PO, et al. (2009) Reproducibility of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 analysis in primary breast cancer: a national survey performed at pathology departments in Sweden. Acta Oncol 48:860–866. doi:10.1080/02841860902862511
Francis GD, Dimech M, Giles L, et al. (2007) Frequency and reliability of oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and HER2 in breast carcinoma determined by immunohistochemistry in Australasia: results of the RCPA Quality Assurance Program. J Clin Pathol 60:1277–1283. doi:10.1136/jcp.2006.044701
Vogel UF (2010) Confirmation of a low HER2 positivity rate of breast carcinomas—limitations of immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization. Diagn Pathol 5:50. doi:10.1186/1746-1596-5-50
Gown AM (2008) Current issues in ER and HER2 testing by IHC in breast cancer. Mod Pathol 21:S8–S15. doi:10.1038/modpathol.2008.34
Saini KS, Azim Jr HA, Metzger-Filho O, et al. (2011) Beyond trastuzumab: new treatment options for HER2-positive breast cancer. Breast 20:S20–S27. doi:10.1016/S0960-9776(11)70289-2
Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, et al. (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:118–145. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.09.2775
Rüschoff J, Hanna W, Bilous M, et al. (2012) HER2 testing in gastric cancer: a practical approach. Mod Pathol 25:637–650. doi:10.1038/modpathol.2011.198
Moelans CB, de Weger RA, Van der Wall E, et al. (2011) Current technologies for HER2 testing in breast cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 80:380–392. doi:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2010.12.005
Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG, et al. (2013) Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 31:3997–4013. doi:10.1200/JCO.2013.50.9984
Reddy JC, Reimann JD, Anderson SM, et al. (2006) Concordance between central and local laboratory HER2 testing from a community-based clinical study. Clin Breast Cancer 7:153–157. doi:10.3816/CBC.2006.n.025
De P, Smith BR, Leyland-Jones B (2010) Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing: where are we? J Clin Oncol 28:4289–4292. doi:10.1200/JCO.2010.29.5071
Sauter G, Lee J, Bartlett JM, et al. (2009) Guidelines for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing: biologic and methodologic considerations. J Clin Oncol 27:1323–1333. doi:10.1200/JCO.2007.14.8197
Minot DM, Voss J, Rademacher S, et al. (2012) Image analysis of HER2 immunohistochemical staining. Reproducibility and concordance with fluorescence in situ hybridization of a laboratory-validated scoring technique. Am J Clin Pathol 137:270–276. doi:10.1309/AJCP9MKNLHQNK2ZX
Dobson L, Conway C, Hanley A, et al. (2010) Image analysis as an adjunct to manual HER-2 immunohistochemical review: a diagnostic tool to standardize interpretation. Histopathology 57:27–38. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2559.2010.03577.x
Tuominen VJ, Tolonen TT, Isola J (2012) ImmunoMembrane: a publicly available web application for digital image analysis of HER2 immunohistochemistry. Histopathology 60:758–767. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2559.2011.04142.x
Schneider CA, Rasband WS, Eliceiri KW (2012) NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods 9:671–675. doi:10.1038/nmeth.2089
Leong AS, Formby M, Haffajee Z, et al. (2006) Refinement of immunohistologic parameters for Her2/neu scoring validation by FISH and CISH. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 14:384–389. doi:10.1097/01.pai.0000210415.53493.d4
Hall BH, Ianosi-Irimie M, Javidian P, et al. (2008) Computer-assisted assessment of the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 immunohistochemical assay in imaged histologic sections using a membrane isolation algorithm and quantitative analysis of positive controls. BMC Med Imaging 8:11. doi:10.1186/1471-2342-8-11
Brügmann A, Eld M, Lelkaitis G, et al. (2012) Digital image analysis of membrane connectivity is a robust measure of HER2 immunostains. Breast Cancer Res Treat 132:41–49. doi:10.1007/s10549-011-1514-2
Masmoudi H, Hewitt SM, Petrick N, et al. (2009) Automated quantitative assessment of HER-2/neu immunohistochemical expression in breast cancer. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 28:916–925. doi:10.1109/TMI.2009.2012901
Keller B, Chen W, Gavrielides MA (2012) Quantitative assessment and classification of tissue-based biomarker expression with color content analysis. Arch Pathol Lab Med 136:539–550. doi:10.5858/arpa.2011-0195-OA
Rojo MG, Bueno G, Slodkowska J (2009) Review of imaging solutions for integrated quantitative immunohistochemistry in the pathology daily practice. Folia Histochem Cytobiol 47:349–354. doi:10.2478/v10042-008-0114-4
Rojo MG, García GB, Mateos CP, et al. (2006) Critical comparison of 31 commercially available digital slide systems in pathology. Int J Surg Pathol 14:285–305. doi:10.1177/1066896906292274
Nordic Immunohistochemical Quality Control (NordiQC). http://www.nordiqc.org/. Accessed 1 June 2015
Dendukuri N, Khetani K, McIsaac M, et al. (2007) Testing for HER2-positive breast cancer: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis. Cmaj 176:1429–1434. doi:10.1503/cmaj.061011
Cuadros M, Villegas R (2009) Systematic review of HER2 breast cancer testing. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 17:1–7. doi:10.1097/PAI.0b013e318169fc1c
Minot DM, Kipp BR, Root RM, et al. (2009) Automated cellular imaging system III for assessing HER2 status in breast cancer specimens: development of a standardized scoring method that correlates with FISH. Am J Clin Pathol 132:133–138. doi:10.1309/AJCPJV0SKAF2PCMY
Cantaloni C, Tonini RE, Eccher C, et al. (2011) Diagnostic value of automated Her2 evaluation in breast cancer: a study on 272 equivocal (score 2+) Her2 immunoreactive cases using an FDA approved system. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 19:306–312. doi:10.1097/PAI.0b013e318205b03a
Turashvili G, Leung S, Turbin D, et al. (2009) Inter-observer reproducibility of HER2 immunohistochemical assessment and concordance with fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH): pathologist assessment compared to quantitative image analysis. BMC Cancer 9:165. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-9-165
Laurinaviciene A, Dasevicius D, Ostapenko V, et al. (2011) Membrane connectivity estimated by digital image analysis of HER2 immunohistochemistry is concordant with visual scoring and fluorescence in situ hybridization results: algorithm evaluation on breast cancer tissue microarrays. Diagn Pathol 6:87. doi:10.1186/1746-1596-6-87
Vyberg M, Nielsen S, Røge R, et al. (2015) Immunohistochemical expression of HER2 in breast cancer: socioeconomic impact of inaccurate tests. BMC Health Serv Res 15:352. doi:10.1186/s12913-015-1018-6
Atkinson R, Mollerup J, Laenkholm AV, et al. (2011) Effects of the change in cutoff values for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status by immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization: a study comparing conventional brightfield microscopy, image analysis-assisted microscopy, and interobserver variation. Arch Pathol Lab Med 135:1010–1016. doi:10.5858/2010-0462-OAR
Potts SJ, Krueger JS, Landis ND, et al. (2012) Evaluating tumor heterogeneity in immunohistochemistry-stained breast cancer tissue. Lab Investig 92:1342–1357. doi:10.1038/labinvest.2012.91
Starczynski J, Atkey N, Connelly Y, et al. (2012) HER2 gene amplification in breast cancer: a rogues’ gallery of challenging diagnostic cases: UKNEQAS interpretation guidelines and research recommendations. Am J Clin Pathol 137:595–605. doi:10.1309/AJCPATBZ2JFN1QQC
Walker RA (2006) Quantification of immunohistochemistry—issues concerning methods, utility and semiquantitative assessment I. Histopathology 49:406–410. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2559.2006.02514.x
van der Loos CM (2008) Multiple immunoenzyme staining: methods and visualizations for the observation with spectral imaging. J Histochem Cytochem 56:313–328. doi:10.1369/jhc.2007.950170
Kayser K, Borkenfeld S, Djenouni A et al (2015) Analysis of texture and objects in microscopic images. Diagn Pathol 1:14. doi: 10.17629/www.diagnosticpathology.eu-2015-1:14
Ince DC, Hatton L, Graham-Cumming J (2012) The case for open computer programs. Nature 482:485–488. doi:10.1038/nature10836
Donoho DL (2010) An invitation to reproducible computational research. Biostatistics 11:385–388. doi:10.1093/biostatistics/kxq028
Jara-Lazaro AR, Thamboo TP, Teh M, et al. (2010) Digital pathology: exploring its applications in diagnostic surgical pathology practice. Pathology 42:512–518. doi:10.3109/00313025.2010.508787
Wilbur DC, Brachtel EF, Gilbertson JR, et al. (2015) Whole slide imaging for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 immunohistochemistry interpretation: accuracy, precision, and reproducibility studies for digital manual and paired glass slide manual interpretation. J Pathol Inform 6:22. doi:10.4103/2153-3539.157788
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Helin, H.O., Tuominen, V.J., Ylinen, O. et al. Free digital image analysis software helps to resolve equivocal scores in HER2 immunohistochemistry. Virchows Arch 468, 191–198 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-015-1868-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-015-1868-7