Impact of the 2018 ASCO/CAP HER2 Guideline Focused Update

ERBB2 is a potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarker in renal clear cell carcinoma

Renal clear cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is a common parenchymal tumor of the kidney, and the discovery of biomarkers for early and effective diagnosis of ccRCC can improve the early diagnosis of patients and thus improve long-term survival. Erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (ERBB2) mediates the processes of cell proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis inhibition. The purpose of this study was to investigate the diagnostic and prognostic role of ERBB2 in ccRCC. We analyzed the expression levels of ERBB2 in various cancers from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) databases. RNA-seq data were analyzed using R packages to identify differentially expressed genes between the high and low ERBB2 expression groups in the TCGA-KIRC dataset. Spearman correlation analysis was performed to determine the correlation between ERBB2 expression and immune cell infiltration, immune checkpoint expression, and PTEN expression. DNA methylation changes and genetic alterations in ERBB2 were assessed using the MethSurv and cBioPortal databases. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the correlation between ERBB2 expression and the clinicopathological characteristics of ccRCC patients. The diagnostic and prognostic value of ERBB2 was assessed using Kaplan‒Meier (K‒M) survival curves, diagnostic ROC curves, time-dependent ROC curves, nomogram models, and Cox regression models. The expression level of ERBB2 is lower in tumor tissues of ccRCC patients than in the corresponding control tissues. Differentially expressed genes associated with ERBB2 were significantly enriched in the pathways "BMP2WNT4FOXO1 pathway in primary endometrial stromal cell differentiation" and "AMAN pathway". In ccRCC tissues, ERBB2 expression levels were associated with immune cell infiltration, immune checkpoints, and PTEN. The DNA methylation status of 10 CpG islands in the ERBB2 gene was associated with the prognosis of ccRCC. ERBB2 expression levels in ccRCC tissues were associated with race, sex, T stage, M stage, histological grade, and pathological stage. Cox regression analysis showed that ERBB2 was a potential independent predictor of overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and progression-free interval (PFI) in ccRCC patients. ROC curve analysis showed that the expression level of ERBB2 could accurately distinguish between ccRCC tissue and adjacent normal renal tissue. Our study showed that ERBB2 expression in ccRCC tissues can be of clinical importance as a potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarker.

The prognostic significance of circulating tumor cell enumeration and HER2 expression by a novel automated microfluidic system in metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The prognostic value of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) has been extensively studied and verified by the CellSearch® system. Varieties of microfluidic systems have been developed to improve capture efficiency with the lack of standardization and automation. This study systematically verified the positive threshold for prognosis and its guidance value in anti-HER2 therapy based on a novel automated microfluidic system OmiCell®.

METHODS

CTCs isolation, enumeration and labeling were performed using the OmiCell® system. CTCs identification and reporting were performed using the DeepSight® scanning system.

RESULTS

The capture efficiency and specificity of OmiCell® system was 91.9% and 90%, respectively. Then, 65 MBC patients with known HER2 status of their metastatic tumors were enrolled. In the cohort, we detected ≥ 1 CTCs in 59 patients (90.8%, range: 1-55 CTCs, median = 6), < 8 CTCs in 45 (69.2%) and ≥ 8 CTCs in 20 (30.8%) patients at baseline. The patients with < 8 CTCs had longer PFS than ≥ 8 CTCs (median, 7 vs. 4.4 months, p = 0.028). CTC enumeration was found to be an independent prognostic factor in our cohort. Moreover, we found a weak concordance between tissue HER2 (tHER2) status and the corresponding CTCs (k = 0.16, p = 0.266). The patients with tHER2 positive and cHER2 negative had better PFS compared with patients with both tHER2 and cHER2 positive (median, 8.2 vs. 3.3 months, p = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

This clinical study shows the prognosis value of a new threshold of CTC number and meanwhile the guidance value of cHER2 status in anti-HER2 therapy.

Detection of high-risk patients resistant to CDK4/6 inhibitors with hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative advanced and metastatic breast cancer in Japan (KBCSG-TR-1316)

BACKGROUND

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) improve the prognosis of hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative advanced/metastatic breast cancer (HR+/HER2- mBC). However, some cancers show resistance to CDK4/6i and have a poor prognosis. The non-luminal disease score (NOLUS) was developed to predict non-luminal disease using immunohistochemical analysis.

METHODS

The association between the efficacy of CDK4/6i and NOLUS was investigated by evaluating pathological and clinical data, including real-world progression-free survival (rw-PFS) and overall survival (OS). Real-world data of patients with HR+/HER2- mBC who received CDK4/6i therapy [palbociclib or abemaciclib] as first- or second-line endocrine treatments was obtained. NOLUS was calculated using the formula: NOLUS (0-100) = - 0.45 × estrogen receptor (ER) (%) - 0.28 × progesterone receptor (PR) (%) + 0.27 × Ki67(%) + 73, and the patients were divided into two groups: NOLUS-positive (≥ 51.38) and NOLUS-negative (< 51.38).

RESULTS

Of the 300 patients, 28 (9.3%) were NOLUS-positive, and 272 (90.7%) were NOLUS-negative. The expression rates (%) of ER and PgR in NOLUS-positive patients were lower than those in NOLUS-negative patients (p < 0.001). Ki67 expression was higher in NOLUS-positive patients. There were statistically significant differences in prognosis (rw-PFS and OS) between the two groups. Moreover, NOLUS-negative patients showed statistically better rw-PFS with first-line therapy than second-line therapy. However, NOLUS-positive patients showed poor prognoses with both the first and second therapeutic lines, suggesting CDK4/6i inefficacy for NOLUS-positive patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy and prognosis of CDK4/6i significantly differed between the NOLUS-positive and NOLUS-negative patients. This feasible method can predict patients with HR+/HER2- mBC resistant to CDK4/6i and help select a better therapeutic approach to overcome resistance.

HER2 Equivocal (Score = 2+) Breast Carcinoma Cases Identified by Immunohistochemistry at a South African Hospital. What is the Impact of Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization Testing?

The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) guidelines are used for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) reporting in breast carcinoma. Cases that demonstrate weak to moderate complete membrane immunohistochemical staining in >10% of the tumor are scored as 2+ (equivocal). This study aimed to determine what proportion of HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) score = 2+ breast carcinomas were confirmed to be positive by HER2 fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). There were 241 HER2 IHC score = 2+ breast carcinomas included. Most (74.3%) carcinomas were estrogen and progesterone receptor-positive. Invasive breast carcinoma of no special type (89.2%) was the commonest histologic subtype. Most tumors were grade 2 (64.3%). As per the FISH report, at the time of diagnosis, 27 cases (11.2%) were HER2 FISH positive. All HER2 FISH equivocal cases and one FISH positive case assessed using the 2013 ASCO/CAP HER2 criteria were reclassified to HER2 FISH negative when the 2018 criteria were applied. There was a high level of agreement (κ = 0.979) between HER2 FISH results obtained using the 2013 and the 2018 criteria. This study provides insight into the frequency of HER2 FISH positivity (11.2%) among HER2 IHC score = 2+ breast carcinomas and the impact of modifications to the ASCO/CAP HER2 guidelines. Elimination of the HER2 FISH equivocal category by the 2018 guidelines has reduced the need for repeat testing and simplified clinical management. Reclassification of previous HER2 FISH positive to negative has resulted in some patients being ineligible for costly anti-HER therapy.

Can Patients with HER2-Low Breast Cancer Benefit from Anti-HER2 Therapies? A Review

Breast cancer (BC) poses a severe threat to the health of women worldwide. Currently, different therapeutic regimens are used for BC according to the pathological classification of HER2-positive or HER2-negative. Clinical reports of HER2-low expression indicate that the condition is HER2-negative, which was ineligible for HER2-targeted therapy. In contrast to HER2-zero tumors, however, HER2-low BC is a heterogeneous disease with unique genetic characteristics, prognoses, and different therapeutic responses. Clinical efficacy has been demonstrated by numerous potent and innovative anti-HER2 medications, particularly antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs). Certain ADCs, including T-DXd, have demonstrated good efficacy in some trials either used alone or in conjunction with other medications. To enhance outcomes in individuals with HER2-low BC, immunotherapy and other treatments are frequently combined with HER2-targeted therapy. There are also alternative strategies that target both HER2 and HER3 or other antigenic sites. We hope more individuals with HER2-low BC will benefit from more precise treatment regimens in the future. This article provides a review of existing research and clinical trials.

Evaluation of ERBB2 mRNA Expression in HER2-Equivocal (2+) Immunohistochemistry Cases

Xpert Breast Cancer STRAT4 is a RT-qPCR platform that studies the mRNA expression of ESR1, PGR, MKI67 and ERBB2, providing a positive or negative result for each of these breast cancer biomarkers. Its concordance with immunohistochemistry (IHC) and in situ hybridization (ISH) has been previously demonstrated, but none of the previous works was focused on HER2-equivocal (2+) cases identified by IHC. Thus, we studied the concordance between IHC/ISH and STRAT4 results for 112 HER2 2+ IBC samples, using 148 HER2 0+, 1+ and 3+ (no-HER2 2+) samples for comparison. We found 91.3% accuracy for the determination of HER2 status globally, 99.3% for no-HER2 2+ samples and 80.7% for HER2 2+ samples. Regarding the other biomarkers, we obtained 96.4% accuracy for estrogen receptor, 84.1% for progesterone receptor and 58.2% for Ki67. Our results suggest that the use of ERBB2 mRNA for the evaluation of HER2 2+ cases is not a reliable reflex method to assess the ERBB2 amplification status.

Breast Cancer With a HER2 FISH Group 2 Result: Should HER2 Tests be Repeated?

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) group 2 pattern (HER2 <4 and HER2/CEP17 ratio ≥2, a subset of monosomy CEP17) was historically considered HER2-positive, but mostly HER2-negative according to updated 2018 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guidelines unless 3+ by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Therapeutic relevance of this group remained elusive, therefore we assessed if repeat IHC and FISH can assist final HER2 classification.

PATIENT AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed HER2 FISH performed at our institution from 2014 to 2018 and identified 23 of 3554 (0.6%) breast cancer cases with at least one-time measurement of HER2 FISH categorized as group 2. Repeat HER2 tests were performed for cases with available alternative tumor samples and compared with initial testing following 2018 ASCO/CAP guidelines.

RESULTS

Only 1 of 23 group 2 cases was HER2-positive, 0/18 in primary and 1/5 in metastatic/recurrent tumors. Of 13 primary tumors with repeat HER2 results; 10 (77%) remained HER2-negative; 3 (23%) changed from HER2-negative (group 2 and IHC 2+) to HER2-positive (group 1 and IHC 2+). Among 8 of these 13 patients receiving neoadjuvant systemic therapy containing anti-HER2 agent, 3 (38%) achieved pathologic complete response (pCR). Two of 3 pCR cases were HER2-positive converters on repeat testing. Three pCR cases were ER-negative or -low positive and Ki67 ≥40%, while 5 partial responders were ER-positive and Ki67 <40% (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer with HER2 FISH group 2 result may represent heterogeneous populations of tumor cells being originated de novo or preferentially selected secondary to therapy. Repeat HER2 tests on alternative samples may be considered to guide anti-HER2 therapy.

The role of mineralocorticoids and glucocorticoids under the impact of 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase in human breast lesions

We attempted to explore the possible involvement of the in situ availability of mineralocorticoids and mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) in the pathogenesis of mammary ductal carcinoma. We also explored their individual profiles among different subtypes of invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type (IDC-NST) by evaluating the status of MR, Glucocorticoid receptor (GR), and 11β hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (HSD) 1/2 at each stage of the putative cascade of the mammary ductal proliferative disorders. In this study, IDC-NST, ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), and non-pathological breast tissues were all evaluated by immunohistochemistry. MR was significantly lower in ADH than in DCIS or IDC-NST. 11βHSD2 was significantly lower in ADH than normal breast tissue and 11βHSD1 was significantly higher in DCIS than normal, ADH, or IDC-NST. MR in progesterone receptor (PR)-positive IDC-NST cases tended to be associated with the Ki-67 labeling index. Results of the present study demonstrated that the status of MR and GR in conjunction with the 11βHSDs was correlated with the development of low-grade proliferative disorders in mammary glands. In addition, the potential crosstalk between MR and PR could also influence cell proliferation of breast carcinoma cells but further investigations are required for clarification.

Updates on breast biomarkers

Recent advancements in breast cancer treatment have ushered in a new era of precision medicine. Novel trials have led to the approval of a growing list of personalized therapies and corresponding biomarkers. These advancements have shifted the pathologist's practice into a leading role in the management breast cancer. Understanding the complex algorithms and diagnostic modalities used to assess predictive and prognostic biomarkers is central for quality oncology care. ER and HER2 subcategorize breast cancers into treatment groups under which different biomarkers and therapies are indicated, while they also serve as predictive biomarkers for specific targeted treatments. This review will cover the evolution and latest updates of the CAP/ASCO guidelines relevant to these two important biomarkers in breast cancer. Still evolving concepts such as HER2 heterogeneity, HER2 "low," and HER2-mutated cancers have the potential to continue to change HER2 testing in breast cancers. In addition to ER and HER2, biomarkers used in specific clinical scenarios will be covered. In early-stage ER-positive/HER2-negative disease, multi-gene expression panels (such as OncotypeDX) have emerged as the new standard biomarker when determining if chemotherapy should be added to endocrine therapy. In the more aggressive ER-negative/HER2-positive or triple negative early-stage breast cancers, response to neoadjuvant therapy has proved to be a useful biomarker to help determine if additional therapy should be added for patients with an incomplete response. Ki67 has also recently emerged as a marker that can be used to identify the highest risk ER-positive and HER2-negative cancers if considering adding a cell cycle inhibitor (abemaciclib) to endocrine therapy. Importantly, in the metastatic setting, numerous predictive biomarkers have emerged, including recommendations for germline BRCA mutation testing for all metastatic patients (to determine if PARP inhibitor therapy is an option) and other ER-/HER2-dependent biomarkers such as PD-L1 (for potential immunotherapy in triple negative patients) and PIK3CA mutation status (for potential PI3K inhibitor therapy in ER-positive metastatic patients). Other less common biomarkers of targeted therapy options (e.g., MSI/MMR, TMB, NTRK) as well as comprehensive genomic profiling to identify uncommon targets are also available in the metastatic setting to determine additional treatment options.

Intratumoral Heterogeneity and Immune Response Indicators to Predict Overall Survival in a Retrospective Study of HER2-Borderline (IHC 2+) Breast Cancer Patients

Breast cancer (BC) categorized as human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) borderline [2+ by immunohistochemistry (IHC 2+)] presents challenges for the testing, frequently obscured by intratumoral heterogeneity (ITH). This leads to difficulties in therapy decisions. We aimed to establish prognostic models of overall survival (OS) of these patients, which take into account spatial aspects of ITH and tumor microenvironment by using hexagonal tiling analytics of digital image analysis (DIA). In particular, we assessed the prognostic value of Immunogradient indicators at the tumor–stroma interface zone (IZ) as a feature of antitumor immune response. Surgical excision samples stained for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), Ki67, HER2, and CD8 from 275 patients with HER2 IHC 2+ invasive ductal BC were used in the study. DIA outputs were subsampled by HexT for ITH quantification and tumor microenvironment extraction for Immunogradient indicators. Multiple Cox regression revealed HER2 membrane completeness (HER2 MC) (HR: 0.18, p = 0.0007), its spatial entropy (HR: 0.37, p = 0.0341), and ER contrast (HR: 0.21, p = 0.0449) as independent predictors of better OS, with worse OS predicted by pT status (HR: 6.04, p = 0.0014) in the HER2 non-amplified patients. In the HER2-amplified patients, HER2 MC contrast (HR: 0.35, p = 0.0367) and CEP17 copy number (HR: 0.19, p = 0.0035) were independent predictors of better OS along with worse OS predicted by pN status (HR: 4.75, p = 0.0018). In the non-amplified tumors, three Immunogradient indicators provided the independent prognostic value: CD8 density in the tumor aspect of the IZ and CD8 center of mass were associated with better OS (HR: 0.23, p = 0.0079 and 0.14, p = 0.0014, respectively), and CD8 density variance along the tumor edge predicted worse OS (HR: 9.45, p = 0.0002). Combining these three computational indicators of the CD8 cell spatial distribution within the tumor microenvironment augmented prognostic stratification of the patients. In the HER2-amplified group, CD8 cell density in the tumor aspect of the IZ was the only independent immune response feature to predict better OS (HR: 0.22, p = 0.0047). In conclusion, we present novel prognostic models, based on computational ITH and Immunogradient indicators of the IHC biomarkers, in HER2 IHC 2+ BC patients.

HER2 Testing: Insights From Pathologists' Perspective on Technically Challenging HER2 FISH Cases

OBJECTIVE

College of American Pathologists and the American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines provide straightforward criteria for HER2 interpretation in breast carcinomas; however, a subset of cases present unusual diagnostic dilemmas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten challenging HER2 fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) cases were selected for analysis. The study included a variety of problematic cases such as those with discordant immunohistochemistry (IHC) and FISH results, cases with high intratumoral variability in HER2 copy number, a case with a highly amplified clone in 5% to 10% of the tumor sample, and a case with tumor cells containing tightly clumped HER2 signals. Six high volume HER2 FISH laboratories performed and interpreted HER2 FISH (adding HER2 IHC if necessary). Interpretation strategies were discussed.

RESULTS

There was 100% concordance between laboratories in 4/10 cases. Tumors with increased intratumoral variability (tumors with high variability in HER2 copy number per cell but which otherwise do not fulfill College of American Pathologists and the American Society of Clinical Oncology criteria for heterogeneity) exhibited 100% concordance in 3/4 cases, but 1 case had only 50% agreement. Low positive HER2 cases (group 1 cases with <6 average HER2 copies/cell) had 1 laboratory disagreeing with the majority in 4/4 cases, and this was the only category with discordance between IHC and FISH methodologies. All laboratories identified the case with heterogeneity and interpreted it as positive. Five of the 6 laboratories interpreted the case with tightly clustered HER2 signals as positive.

CONCLUSIONS

This study offers specific observations and interpretation strategies that laboratories can use when confronted with difficult HER 2 cases. It then highlights communication strategies a laboratory may use to discuss these unusual HER2 results with the clinical team.

An Evaluation of Clinicopathological Correlation and Outcome of Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Subgroups Reclassified According to the Latest ASCO/CAP Guideline

BACKGROUND

The latest American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guideline has updated the interpretation of uncommon human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) in situ hybridization (ISH) patterns (groups 2-4) with concomitant HER2 immunohistochemistry, leading to changes in the diagnosis of these subgroups. We sought to assess the clinicopathological features and outcomes in these subgroups in detail with our local cohort.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Clinicopathologic features of groups 2 to 4 were compared to the typical amplified group (group 1: HER2/CEP17 ≥ 2, HER2 ≥ 4) and non-amplified group (group 5: HER2/CEP17 < 2, HER2 < 4).

RESULTS

Group 2 (HER2/CEP17 ≥ 2, HER2 < 4) cases showed lower Ki67 expression and grade (P ≤ .002) than group 1 but no differences compared with group 5. Group 4 (HER2/CEP17 < 2, HER2 = 4-6) cases were associated with less necrosis, more estrogen receptor positivity, lower grade, more nodal metastases, and more special histotypes (P ≤ .037) than group 1, but higher grade and more nodal metastases (P ≤ .021) than group 5. Except for presenting as a larger tumor and of special histotypes, group 3 (HER2/CEP17 < 2, HER2 ≥ 6) cases showed no other significant differences from group 1, but were of higher grade and Ki67 level than groups 2, 4, and 5. Group 4, similar to group 5, showed worse survival than group 1 (disease-free survival: log-rank = 5.547, P = .019; overall survival: log-rank = 4.678, P = .031). The rate of relapse was similar in group 4 with and without anti-HER2 therapy, albeit with limited cases.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate more similarities among groups 2, 4, and 5 than between groups 1 and 3, supporting the HER2 categorization in the latest guideline. Additional studies may be warranted to assess the outcomes of these patients with different management approaches.

HER2 testing in breast cancers: comparison of assays and interpretation using ASCO/CAP 2013 and 2018 guidelines

PURPOSE

HER2 overexpression and gene amplification are routinely tested by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), respectively. In addition, HER2 mRNA expression is also tested by the Oncotype DX assay. Discordance between laboratories among the different assays remains a problem. To improve the routine HER2 reporting, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) updated their guidelines in 2018. Our study will compare concordance of HER2 status by IHC and FISH using ASCO/CAP 2013 and 2018 guidelines with Oncotype DX.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 657 estrogen receptor positive primary breast cancer cases with available Oncotype DX tests between 2011 and 2018. Medical records were reviewed for HER2 results by IHC, FISH, and Oncotype DX. The HER2 results by different assays and between 2013 and 2018 guidelines were compared.

RESULTS

Of the 657 cases, 280 were tested by IHC, FISH, and Oncotype DX. HER2-equivocal cases by IHC 2013 guidelines were all negative (67/67, 100%) by FISH 2018 guidelines and by Oncotype DX. HER2-equivocal cases by FISH 2013 guidelines were all negative (16/16, 100%) by FISH 2018 guidelines, while 15/16 (93.8%) negative and 1/16 (6.2%) equivocal by Oncotype DX. The HER2-equivocal and HER2-negative groups were similar in age, gender, histology, grade, and Ki67 score.

CONCLUSIONS

HER2 concordance was highest between Oncotype DX (99.6%) and FISH per 2018 guidelines. This suggests that the ASCO/CAP 2018 guidelines improved the accurate stratification of HER2-equivocal cases.

Assessment of HER2 using the 2018 ASCO/CAP guideline update for invasive breast cancer: a critical look at cases classified as HER2 2+ by immunohistochemistry

In 2018, the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists revised the criteria for HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) equivocal (2+) classification in their updated guideline. We reviewed invasive breast cancer specimens originally classified as equivocal (2+) under the 2018 guideline that underwent HER2 fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) testing from August 2018 to August 2019 at our Canadian reference hospital to investigate cases with ambiguous staining patterns between the 1+ and 2+ definitions. Demographics, pathologic features, and pre-analytic conditions were recorded. The H&E and corresponding HER2 IHC slides were reviewed to confirm tumor type and grade, and classify as HER2 indeterminate, 0, 1+, 2+, or "Intermediate" (staining features between the 1+ and 2+ classifications). FISH testing was performed on 289 cases and 273 met inclusion criteria. The FISH-amplified rate was 12.1%. Upon IHC review, 44.7% (122/273) of cases were reclassified as Intermediate. These cases had incomplete staining with moderate intensity (43/122, 35.3%) and/or <10% complete weak or moderate staining (102/122, 83.6%). Intermediate cases had a significantly lower frequency of amplified FISH results than 2+ cases (p < 0.0001), with only four (3.3%) FISH positive and two (1.6%) FISH heterogeneous. Our study highlights the ambiguity in the current guideline for classifying some HER2 IHC patterns. As the rate of gene amplification in these cases was low (4.9%), we recommend adhering to the 2018 HER2 2+ criteria for reflex FISH testing. However, cases with <10% moderate complete staining and certain heterogeneous patterns warrant special consideration. Further descriptive clarification of 1+ criteria is needed.

Quantitative Impact of the 2018 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) Practice Guideline Update on Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Testing in Breast Cancer: A Systematic Analysis

CONTEXT.—

The global impact of the new 2018 American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) practice guideline update on the overall HER2 status designation, compared with the prior 2013 iteration, is unknown.

OBJECTIVES.—

To report the quantitative impact of the new guideline on HER2 status distribution.

DESIGN.—

The analysis comprised a retrospective cohort of patients from the authors' institution, combined with other peer-reviewed publications that assessed the impact of the 2018 guideline in relation to the 2013 guideline.

RESULTS.—

Our study revealed that the new guideline led to an average 9% reclassification rate for the overall HER2 status, with a net gain in overall HER2 negative designation. This is largely due to reclassification of the equivocal (Group 4) groups. Unexpectedly, infrequent but consistent discordance between Group 1/5 and fluorescence in situ hybridization results are observed across studies (1.8%; 73 of 3965 cases where fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry are both reported).

CONCLUSIONS.—

Early clinical recognition of these resultant changes, including emerging issues of tumor heterogeneity, and potential discordance between immunohistochemistry to fluorescence in situ hybridization, is important for accurate clinical assessment of individual HER2 test results.

HER2 Testing for Breast Cancer in the Genomics Laboratory: A Sea Change for Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization

CONTEXT.—

Guidelines for HER2 testing in breast cancer have changed over time, from the US Food and Drug Administration guideline to the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guidelines published in 2007, 2013, and 2018.

OBJECTIVE.—

To investigate the change in assignment of HER2 status in breast cancers with equivocal (2+) immunohistochemistry (IHC) results by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) following implementation of the ASCO/CAP 2018 guideline.

DESIGN.—

The study included 3556 invasive breast cancers that were HER2 equivocal (2+) by IHC and were submitted to our FISH laboratory after July 2018. Reflex testing (with repeat IHC staining) was performed on certain categories of FISH results known as groups 2, 3, and 4. Concomitant review of IHC and FISH was performed on these reflex cases per 2018 guideline recommendations. The FISH data were analyzed to compare US Food and Drug Administration and ASCO/CAP 2007, 2013, and 2018 interpretations.

RESULTS.—

Of 3548 invasive breast cancers with complete data available, the percentage agreement for FISH according to different guidelines was highest for ASCO/CAP 2018 versus US Food and Drug Administration (96.5%), followed by ASCO/CAP 2018 versus 2007 (93.8%), and lowest with ASCO/CAP 2018 versus 2013 (83.7%). Per the 2018 guideline, reflex IHC testing was performed on 633 breast cancers (17.8%); the majority of reflex testing results were negative (541 of 633; 85.5%). The overall distribution of HER2 FISH results (per the 2018 guideline) was 88.5% negative and 11.5% positive.

CONCLUSIONS.—

By eliminating the equivocal FISH category, the 2018 ASCO/CAP guideline significantly reduced the HER2 FISH-positive rate in tumors with equivocal (2+) IHC results.

Impact of the Updated Guidelines on Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) Testing in Breast Cancer

Purpose

In 2007, the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists had established a human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing guideline, which was updated in 2013 and subsequently in 2018. We assessed the clinical impact of the recent update by comparing the in situ hybridization (ISH) results based on the 2007, 2013, and 2018 guidelines.

Methods

We assessed 2 cohorts. The first cohort included 1,161 primary invasive breast cancer (IBC) samples including 18 bilateral IBC cases, with both immunohistochemistry (IHC) and silver-enhanced ISH (SISH) results available for the HER2 status. The second cohort included 160 IBC cases with equivocal HER2 IHC, assessed using SISH. We retrospectively evaluated and compared the HER2 SISH results.

Results

There were 22 (1.9%) and 20 (12.5%) cases with altered SISH results according to the 2013 guidelines in cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. As per the 2018 guidelines, final HER2 statuses of 16 (1.4%) and 14 (8.5%) cases changed in cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. The 2013 guidelines increased the positive rate compared to the 2007 guidelines, in both cohorts (0.6% and 6.2%, respectively). Most equivocal cases in cohorts 1 (92.3%) and 2 (100%) as per the 2013 guidelines were reclassified as HER2-negative according to the 2018 guidelines. The 2018 guidelines increased the negative rates (1.3% in cohort 1 and 8.7% in cohort 2) and slightly decreased the positive rates (−0.2% in cohort 1 and −3.1% in cohort 2), compared to the 2013 guidelines. With each update, minor changes in the positive and negative rates were observed in whole breast cancer samples (cohort 1). However, the 2018 guidelines affected previously defined HER2-positive IBC with equivocal IHC results.

Conclusion

Under the 2013 guidelines, the positive and equivocal cases increased. However, the 2018 guidelines eliminated ambiguous cases by reclassifying them as HER2-negative.

The impact of 2018 ASCO-CAP HER2 testing guidelines on breast cancer HER2 results. An audit of 2132 consecutive cases evaluated by immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization

The 2018 iteration of the ASCO-CAP HER2 testing guidelines proposes significant changes with an emphasis on the integration of concurrent immunohistochemistry (IHC) and in situ hybridization (ISH). We wished to evaluate the impact of these changes on clinical practice. Between Jan 2012 to Feb 2017, 2132 consecutive invasive breast carcinomas were evaluated with IHC and ISH for HER2. The sample tested was the breast primary or axillary nodes in all but 57 (2.7%) distant metastases. For 1824 cases with both dual-probe ISH and IHC results, the ISH subgroup was 1: 299 (16.4%), 2: 19 (1.0%), 1.0%, 3: 6 (0.3%), 4: 48 (2.6%) and 5: 1452 (79.6%). Ultimately 21% of group 2 and 4 cases and 80% of group 4 cases were positive. The change in HER2 status between the 2018 vs 2013 was: amplified in 323 (15.2%) vs 15.5%; not amplified in 1804 (84.6%) vs 82.2%; equivocal in 0 vs 2.3% previously. In 22 of 2127 cases (1.03%) the 2013 and 2018 results were discordant, all in groups 2-4. The discrepant cases included 15 of 331 (4.5%) of 2013 amplified cancers, now negative (all in groups 2 or 3) and 7 of 1796 (0.4%) 2013 nonamplified cases, now positive (all in group 4). Because of routine testing with both IHC and ISH, we found 6 of 1147 (0.52%) IHC negative (0 or 1+) cases were amplified by ISH. Further, 19 of 289 (6.6%) of IHC 3+ cases were nonamplified by ISH, circumstances not covered by these guidelines. In summary at the population level, the 2018 ASCO-CAP guidelines have a 99% agreement with the 2013 results. A major advantage is the abolishment of the clinically problematic equivocal category. Routine performance of both IHC and ISH uncovers a small proportion of cancers whose HER2 status is not addressed by these guidelines.

A clinicopathological study of 30 breast cancer cases with a HER2/CEP17 ratio of ≥2.0 but an average HER2 copy number of <4.0 signals per cell

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) have recently issued updated guidelines on human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in invasive breast cancers. Cases with a HER2/chromosome enumeration probe 17 (CEP17) ratio of ≥2.0 but an average HER2 copy number of <4.0 signals per cell (ISH group 2) are no longer automatically classified as ISH positive. Herein, 30 cases in ISH group 2 were collected. Another 100 patients with a HER2/CEP17 ratio <2.0 and <4.0 HER2 signals per cell (ISH group 5) and 100 patients with a HER2/CEP17 ratio of ≥2.0 and an average HER2 copy number of ≥4.0 signals per cell (ISH group 1) were also recruited for comparison. According to the 2018 ASCO/CAP guidelines, all the cases in ISH group 2 were categorized as HER2 negative. The clinicopathological characteristics of the patients in ISH group 2 were intermediate between ISH group 1 and group 5. Survival analyses revealed that there was no significant disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) difference between patients with or without targeted therapy in ISH group 2, as well as between patients with targeted therapy in ISH group 1 and patients in ISH group 2. Patients without targeted therapy in ISH group 2 had a significantly worse OS than patients with targeted therapy in ISH group 1 and patients in ISH group 5. In conclusion, patients in ISH group 2 represent a biologically heterogeneous subset, which are different from those in ISH group 1 and 5. A larger cohort of patients in ISH group 2 should be included for future researches to define the efficacy of HER2-targeted therapy.

HER2 testing across practices-Have we come to a consensus on the ideal method of testing? A systematic literature review

Human epidermal growth factor (HER2) is an oncogene that codes for HER2 protein. The gene is amplified, and protein is overexpressed in 20% of patients and carries a poor prognosis. HER2-positive tumors tend to be more aggressive and highly proliferative. In 2006, trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting HER2, was approved for use with chemotherapy as an adjuvant treatment for women with HER2-positive breast cancer. The drug has shown improved survival rates for women with HER2-positive breast cancer. As promised for survival in HER2-positive patients continues with new research, and as novel drug approvals emerge, HER2 assessment plays a significant role in adjuvant and in metastatic setting. HER2 assays approved by the US Food and Drug administration include immunohistochemistry (IHC), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and bright field dual in situ hybridization (DISH). Accuracy of HER2 testing across laboratories has an impact on treatment as false-negative testing can deprive the patients of trastuzumab therapy. The current review will focus on the variability of HER2 testing across laboratories and the potential impact on treatment.

Applying the New Guidelines of HER2 Testing in Breast Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) is an important prognostic and predictive biomarker in the breast cancer. The American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathology (ASCO/CAP) has published HER2 testing guidelines in breast cancer. We herein reviewed the HER2 testing guidelines in breast cancer with a focus on the application of the current guidelines.

RECENT FINDINGS

The continual investigation of HER2 testing in breast cancer has resulted in updates in the HER2 testing guidelines. The current guidelines focus on the uncommon clinical scenarios and emphasize the coordination between immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization results, in an effort to improve clarity and accuracy. The ASCO/CAP guidelines provide valuable recommendations to ensure the accurate evaluation of HER2 status in breast cancer patients through standardization. Additional studies, particularly those with long-term outcome data are still needed to validate the guideline recommendations, especially the uncommon cases.

Prognosis in pathology: Are we "prognosticating" or only establishing correlations between independent variables and survival? A study with various analytics cautions about the overinterpretation of statistical results

Survival data from 225 patients with resected pulmonary typical carcinoids were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier statistics (K-M) and "deep learning" methods to illustrate the difference between establishing "correlations" and "prognostications". Cases were stratified into G1 and G2 classes using a ≤5% Ki-67% cut-point. Overall survival, number of patients at risk and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated for the two classes. Seven neural network models (NN) were developed with GMDH Shell 3.8.2 and Statgraphics Centurion 18.1 software, using variable prior probabilities and different numbers of training vs testing cases. The NNs used age, sex, and pTNM, G1 and G2 as input neurons and "alive" and "dead" as output neurons. Areas under the curve (AUC) and other performance measures were evaluated for all models. Log-rank test showed a significant difference in overall survival between G1 and G2 (p < 0.001). However, 95% CI estimates showed considerable variability in survival at different time intervals. Including the number of patients at risk at different time intervals showed that most G2 patients had been censored by 100 weeks. The NN models provided variable "prognostications", with AUC ranging from 0.5 to 1 and variability in the sensitivity, specificity, and other performance measures. The results illustrate the limitations of survival statistics and NNs in predicting the prognosis of individual patients. The need for pathologists not to overinterpret the finding of significant correlations as "prognostic" or "predictive" for individual patients is discussed.

Evolving concepts in HER2 evaluation in breast cancer: Heterogeneity, HER2-low carcinomas and beyond

The human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) is a well-known negative prognostic factor in breast cancer and a target of the monoclonal antibody trastuzumab as well as of other anti-HER2 compounds. Pioneering works on HER2-positive breast cancer in the 90s' launched a new era in clinical research and oncology practice that has reshaped the natural history of this disease. In diagnostic pathology the HER2 status is routinely assessed by using a combination of immunohistochemistry (IHC, to evaluate HER2 protein expression levels) and in situ hybridization (ISH, to assess HER2 gene status). For this purpose, international recommendations have been developed by a consensus of experts in the field, which have changed over the years according to new experimental and clinical data. In this review article we will document the changes that have contributed to a better evaluation of the HER2 status in clinical practice, furthermore we will discuss HER2 heterogeneity defined by IHC and ISH as well as by transcriptomic analysis and we will critically describe the complexity of HER2 equivocal results. Finally, we will introduce the clinical impact of HER2 mutations and we will define the upcoming category of HER2-low breast cancer with respect to emerging clinical data on the efficacy of specific anti-HER2 agents in subgroups of breast carcinomas lacking the classical oncogene addition dictated by HER2 amplification.

The updated 2018 American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline on human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 interpretation in breast cancer: comparison with previous guidelines and clinical significance of the proposed in situ hybridization groups

The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of the updated 2018 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guideline on human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) interpretation in breast cancer compared with that of the previous guidelines and also the significance of in situ hybridization (ISH) groups proposed by the updated guideline. HER2 ISH reports and immunohistochemistry (IHC) data from 1,348 invasive breast cancers diagnosed at a single institution were included in this study. HER2 IHC was reassessed using the 2018 guideline, and HER2 ISH status was determined by the 2007, 2013, and 2018 guidelines. When applying the updated guideline, most of the HER2 ISH-equivocal cases as per the previous guidelines were reclassified as ISH negative, and 0.8% of HER2 ISH-positive tumors as per the 2007 guideline and 2.5% of those as per the 2013 guideline were changed to ISH negative. Accordingly, the negative HER2 ISH results significantly increased in the 2018 guideline compared with the 2013 guideline. HER2 ISH-positive tumors in ISH group 3 (HER2/chromosome enumeration probe 17 [CEP17] ratio <2.0 and average HER2 copy number ≥6.0 per cell) were characterized by equivocal HER2 protein expression, CEP17 copy number gain, and low HER2 copy numbers compared with classic HER2 ISH-positive tumors in ISH group 1 (HER2/CEP17 ratio ≥2.0 and average HER2 copy number ≥4.0 per cell). HER2 ISH-negative tumors in ISH group 4 (HER2/CEP17 ratio <2.0 with average HER2 copy number ≥4.0 and < 6.0 per cell) revealed more aggressive clinicopathologic features and poorer clinical outcomes than those in ISH group 5 (HER2/CEP17 ratio <2.0 and average HER2 copy number <4.0 per cell), especially in the hormone receptor-positive subgroup. In conclusion, implementation of the updated 2018 ASCO/CAP guideline leads to a significant increase in HER2 ISH-negative results compared with the 2013 guideline, mainly via reclassification of the ISH-equivocal cases to ISH-negative ones. ISH groups proposed by the updated guideline provide additional information on the clinicopathologic characteristics of the tumors.

HER2 status in breast cancer: changes in guidelines and complicating factors for interpretation

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) protein overexpression and/or HER2 gene amplification is found in about 20% of invasive breast cancers. It is a sole predictive marker for treatment benefits from HER2 targeted therapy and thus, HER2 testing is a routine practice for newly diagnosed breast cancer in pathology. Currently, HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) is used for a screening test, and in situ hybridization is used as a confirmation test for HER2 IHC equivocal cases. Since the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guidelines on HER2 testing was first released in 2007, it has been updated to provide clear instructions for HER2 testing and accurate determination of HER2 status in breast cancer. During HER2 interpretation, some pitfalls such as intratumoral HER2 heterogeneity and increase in chromosome enumeration probe 17 signals may lead to inaccurate assessment of HER2 status. Moreover, HER2 status can be altered after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or during metastatic progression, due to biologic or methodologic issues. This review addresses recent updates of ASCO/CAP guidelines and factors complicating in the interpretation of HER2 status in breast cancers.

Targeted therapeutic options and future perspectives for HER2-positive breast cancer

Over the past 2 decades, there has been an extraordinary progress in the regimens developed for the treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer. Trastuzumab, pertuzumab, lapatinib, and ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) are commonly recommended anti-HER2 target agents by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. This review summarizes the most significant and updated research on clinical scenarios related to HER2-positive breast cancer management in order to revise the guidelines of everyday clinical practices. In this article, we present the data on anti-HER2 clinical research of neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and metastatic studies from the past 2 decades. We also highlight some of the promising strategies that should be critically considered. Lastly, this review lists some of the ongoing clinical trials, findings of which may soon be available.

Assessing the impact of the 2018 American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists recommendations on human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization in breast carcinoma

The American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists recently updated their recommendations on human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in invasive breast cancer, with a focus on the clarification of less common test patterns of ISH. We assessed the impact of the updated ASCO/CAP guidelines on 1044 FISH tested tumors by comparing categorization according to the 2007, 2013, and 2018 ISH classification criteria. The 2013 guidelines increased the number of positive cases (17.4% vs 10.7%) identifying 70 (6.7%) additional patients who met the eligibility criteria for consideration for HER2-targeted therapy compared with the 2007 guidelines. There was a reduction in equivocal tumors (7.7%) with tumors classified as equivocal by the 2007 guidelines (n = 136) redistributed into positive (74, 54.4%) and negative (49, 36.0%) groups. The 2018 guidelines reclassified 10.8% of tumors in our series with a reduction in the number of positive tumors (7.1%). While the proportion of positive tumors (10.2%) was similar to that in 2007 (10.7%), the composition of this group was significantly altered. HER2 equivocal cases, a group which under the 2013 guidelines caused diagnostic and treatment difficulties, were largely eliminated. Our findings suggest that the 2018 update represents a potentially significant change in therapeutic options for a substantial proportion of patients with 2.9% of FISH-positive tumors according to the 2007 and 2013 guidelines now categorized as HER2 negative and, thus, ineligible for HER2-targeted therapy.