Publications (2)20.95 Total impact
-
Article: Comparison of quantitative immunofluorescence with conventional methods for HER2/neu testing with respect to response to trastuzumab therapy in metastatic breast cancer.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Selection for trastuzumab therapy depends on a companion diagnostic assessment of HER2 by either immunohistochemistry (IHC) for protein overexpression or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to detect gene amplification. Although many studies have compared IHC to FISH, few have compared the tests to the true gold standard, tumor response. To compare HER2 testing by FISH and IHC along with a third immunofluorescence-based assay (automated quantitative analysis-tissue microarray [AQUA-TMA]) and to assess the value of each test for prediction of response to trastuzumab. Immunohistochemistry and FISH assays were done on both whole slides (IHC-WS and FISH-WS) and on TMAs (IHC-TMA and FISH-TMA). AQUA was only done on TMAs (AQUA-TMA). Response was assessed according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. AQUA-TMA scores showed a significant linear relationship to both the FISH signal ratio and IHC scores on whole sections and TMAs. Assay assessment by outcome showed no association between response and FISH-WS ratio (P = .96), FISH-TMA (P = .55), IHC-WS (P = .75), or IHC-TMA (P = .06), but a significant relationship between AQUA score and categoric response was observed (P = .01). Assessed as a function of outcome using models of logistic regression, both AQUA-TMA and IHC-TMA were equally significant (P = .01). FISH-WS was the most sensitive assay, with a significantly higher true-positive fraction than all other tests except AQUA-TMA, although it was the least specific. IHC-TMA was the most specific assay. The lowest misclassification rate was achieved using AQUA-TMA (0.30). Both AQUA-TMA and IHC-TMA were substantially more predictive than the FISH or IHC-WS tests. Although these results are derived from a small retrospective series, they suggest that accurate measurement of protein expression and unbiased selection of tissue for measurement may be key factors in prediction of response.Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine 11/2008; 132(10):1635-47. · 2.58 Impact Factor -
Article: Quantitative justification of the change from 10% to 30% for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 scoring in the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guidelines: tumor heterogeneity in breast cancer and its implications for tissue microarray based assessment of outcome.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The variability in scoring of immunohistochemistry, whether a result of true heterogeneity or artifacts in preparation, has led to decreased reliability in companion diagnostics and the recommendation for new standards (eg, the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists [ASCO-CAP] guidelines). The basis of this problem is the amount of tissue required to be representative of an entire tumor. Because protein expression on tissue microarrays (TMAs) can be rigorously measured and one 0.6-mm spot is equivalent to two to three high-power fields, we used TMAs to assess levels of heterogeneity and to determine optimal representation as a function of outcome. We analyzed estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) expression in two cohorts (n = 676 and n = 152) on a series of four to five separate TMA cores and assessed heterogeneity by linear regression analysis. Minimum, average, and maximum scores were generated for each set, which were then assessed for prognostic and predictive value. Each marker shows some heterogeneity, but average r values between 0.7 and 0.8 are seen between TMA spots. Analysis for prognostic value shows that the highest maximum score (of five spots) is the most prognostic for ER, whereas a high HER-2 minimum score is most prognostic for poor outcome and most predictive of response to trastuzumab. These results suggest that the representivity required for each biomarker may be a function of its role in tumorigenesis. Furthermore, these results provide scientific basis for the ASCO-CAP guidelines for assessment of HER-2 expression but perhaps suggest that the 30% figure is still too conservative.Journal of Clinical Oncology 01/2008; 25(34):5418-25. · 18.37 Impact Factor
