Abstract
Prospective studies have demonstrated that approximately 20% of HER2 testing may be inaccurate. When carefully validated testing is conducted, available data do not clearly demonstrate the superiority of either IHC or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) as a predictor of benefit from anti-HER2 therapy. In addition, the interpretation of the findings of HER2 tests according to international guidelines is not uniform. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) recently published practice guidelines for a definition of HER2 amplification heterogeneity that can give rise to discrepant results between IHC and FISH assays for HER2. In this article, we compare the HER2 status of 291 non consecutive breast cancers. The status is determined by both IHC and FISH approaches, using a specific FISH strategy to investigate genetic heterogeneity. Our data demonstrate that HER2 amplified cells may be found as diffuse, clustered in a specific area or section, intermingled with non-amplified cells or confined to metastatic nodules. The correct evaluation of ratio value in the presence of genetic heterogeneity and of polysomy contributes to the accurate assessment of HER2 status and potentially affects the selection of appropriate anti-HER2 therapy. By taking into account the presence of different genetic cell populations, the immunotherapy eligibility criteria for HER2 FISH scoring proposed in the CAP (2009) and SIGU guidelines identify an additional subset of cases for trastuzumab or lapatinib therapy compared to the ASCO/CAP (2007) guidelines.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
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 (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(1):118–145
Joensuu H, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen PL, Bono P, Alanko T, Kataja V, Asola R, Utriainen T, Kokko R, Hemminki A, Tarkkanen M, Turpeenniemi-Hujanen T, Jyrkkio S, Flander M, Helle L, Ingalsuo S, Johansson K, Jaaskelainen AS, Pajunen M, Rauhala M, Kaleva-Kerola J, Salminen T, Leinonen M, Elomaa I, Isola J (2006) Adjuvant docetaxel or vinorelbine with or without trastuzumab for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 354(8):809–820
Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Procter M, Leyland-Jones B, Goldhirsch A, Untch M, Smith I, Gianni L, Baselga J, Bell R, Jackisch C, Cameron D, Dowsett M, Barrios CH, Steger G, Huang CS, Andersson M, Inbar M, Lichinitser M, Lang I, Nitz U, Iwata H, Thomssen C, Lohrisch C, Suter TM, Ruschoff J, Suto T, Greatorex V, Ward C, Straehle C, McFadden E, Dolci MS, Gelber RD (2005) Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 353(16):1659–1672
Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J, Suman VJ, Geyer CE Jr, Davidson NE, Tan-Chiu E, Martino S, Paik S, Kaufman PA, Swain SM, Pisansky TM, Fehrenbacher L, Kutteh LA, Vogel VG, Visscher DW, Yothers G, Jenkins RB, Brown AM, Dakhil SR, Mamounas EP, Lingle WL, Klein PM, Ingle JN, Wolmark N (2005) Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 353(16):1673–1684
Di Leo A, Gomez HL, Aziz Z, Zvirbule Z, Bines J, Arbushites MC, Guerrera SF, Koehler M, Oliva C, Stein SH, Williams LS, Dering J, Finn RS, Press MF (2008) Phase III, double-blind, randomized study comparing lapatinib plus paclitaxel with placebo plus paclitaxel as first-line treatment for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26(34):5544–5552
Geyer CE, Forster J, Lindquist D, Chan S, Romieu CG, Pienkowski T, Jagiello-Gruszfeld A, Crown J, Chan A, Kaufman B, Skarlos D, Campone M, Davidson N, Berger M, Oliva C, Rubin SD, Stein S, Cameron D (2006) Lapatinib plus capecitabine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 355(26):2733–2743
Tibiletti MG, Martin V, Bernasconi B, Del Curto B, Pecciarini L, Uccella S, Pruneri G, Ponzoni M, Mazzucchelli L, Martinelli G, Ferreri AJ, Pinotti G, Assanelli A, Scandurra M, Doglioni C, Zucca E, Capella C, Bertoni F (2009) BCL2, BCL6, MYC, MALT 1, and BCL10 rearrangements in nodal diffuse large B-cell lymphomas: a multicenter evaluation of a new set of fluorescent in situ hybridization probes and correlation with clinical outcome. Hum Pathol 40(5):645–652
Interphase FISH on solid tumors: recommendations for use on histological sections in daily practice. http://sigu.net/
ISCN: An International System for Human Cytogenetic Nomenclature (2009) In: Shaffer LG, Slovak ML, Campbell LJ (eds) S. Karger, Basel
Vance GH, Barry TS, Bloom KJ, Fitzgibbons PL, Hicks DG, Jenkins RB, Persons DL, Tubbs RR, Hammond ME (2009) Genetic heterogeneity in HER2 testing in breast cancer: panel summary and guidelines. Arch Pathol Lab Med 133(4):611–612
Tibiletti MG (2004) Specificity of interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization for detection of chromosome aberrations in tumor pathology. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 155(2):143–148
Paternoster SF, Brockman SR, McClure RF, Remstein ED, Kurtin PJ, Dewald GW (2002) A new method to extract nuclei from paraffin-embedded tissue to study lymphomas using interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization. Am J Pathol 160(6):1967–1972
Jonsson G, Staaf J, Vallon-Christersson J, Ringner M, Holm K, Hegardt C, Gunnarsson H, Fagerholm R, Strand C, Agnarsson BA, Kilpivaara O, Luts L, Heikkila P, Aittomaki K, Blomqvist C, Loman N, Malmstrom P, Olsson H, Johannsson OT, Arason A, Nevanlinna H, Barkardottir RB, Borg A (2010) Genomic subtypes of breast cancer identified by array-comparative genomic hybridization display distinct molecular and clinical characteristics. Breast Cancer Res 12(3):R42. doi:10.1186/bcr2596
Sircoulomb F, Bekhouche I, Finetti P, Adelaide J, Ben Hamida A, Bonansea J, Raynaud S, Innocenti C, Charafe-Jauffret E, Tarpin C, Ben Ayed F, Viens P, Jacquemier J, Bertucci F, Birnbaum D, Chaffanet M (2010) Genome profiling of ERBB2-amplified breast cancers. BMC Cancer 10:539. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-10-539
Staaf J, Jonsson G, Ringner M, Vallon-Christersson J, Grabau D, Arason A, Gunnarsson H, Agnarsson BA, Malmstrom PO, Johannsson OT, Loman N, Barkardottir RB, Borg A (2010) High-resolution genomic and expression analyses of copy number alterations in HER2-amplified breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 12(3):25. doi:10.1186/bcr2568
Tibiletti MG (2007) Interphase FISH as a new tool in tumor pathology. Cytogenet Genome Res 118(2–4):229–236
Lengauer C, Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B (1997) DNA methylation and genetic instability in colorectal cancer cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94(6):2545–2550
Smid M, Hoes M, Sieuwerts AM, Sleijfer S, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Foekens JA, Martens JW (2011) Patterns and incidence of chromosomal instability and their prognostic relevance in breast cancer subtypes. Breast Cancer Res Treat 128(1):23–30
Brunelli M, Manfrin E, Martignoni G, Miller K, Remo A, Reghellin D, Bersani S, Gobbo S, Eccher A, Chilosi M, Bonetti F (2009) Genotypic intratumoral heterogeneity in breast carcinoma with HER2/neu amplification: evaluation according to ASCO/CAP criteria. Am J Clin Pathol 131(5):678–682
Pertschuk LP, Axiotis CA, Feldman JG, Kim YD, Karavattayhayyil SJ, Braithwaite L (1999) Marked intratumoral heterogeneity of the proto-oncogene her-2/neu determined by three different detection systems. Breast J 5(6):369–374
Shah SS, Ketterling RP, Goetz MP, Ingle JN, Reynolds CA, Perez EA, Chen B (2010) Impact of American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations on HER2 interpretation in breast cancer. Hum Pathol 41(1):103–106
Shin SJ, Hyjek E, Early E, Knowles DM (2006) Intratumoral heterogeneity of her-2/neu in invasive mammary carcinomas using fluorescence in situ hybridization and tissue microarray. Int J Surg Pathol 14(4):279–284
Lewis JT, Ketterling RP, Halling KC, Reynolds C, Jenkins RB, Visscher DW (2005) Analysis of intratumoral heterogeneity and amplification status in breast carcinomas with equivocal (2+) HER-2 immunostaining. Am J Clin Pathol 124(2):273–281
Santinelli A, Pisa E, Stramazzotti D, Fabris G (2008) HER-2 status discrepancy between primary breast cancer and metastatic sites Impact on target therapy. Int J Cancer 122(5):999–1004
Tapia C, Savic S, Wagner U, Schonegg R, Novotny H, Grilli B, Herzog M, Barascud AD, Zlobec I, Cathomas G, Terracciano L, Feichter G, Bubendorf L (2007) HER2 gene status in primary breast cancers and matched distant metastases. Breast Cancer Res 9(3):R31
Hsu CY, Li AF, Yang CF, Ho DM (2010) Proposal of modification for the definition of genetic heterogeneity in HER2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 134(2):162 author reply 163
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Prof. Carlo Capella for his critical reading of the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bernasconi, B., Chiaravalli, A.M., Finzi, G. et al. Genetic heterogeneity in HER2 testing may influence therapy eligibility. Breast Cancer Res Treat 133, 161–168 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1744-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1744-3