High Fidelity of Breast Biomarker Metrics: A 10-Year Experience in a Single, Large Academic Institution

Automated immunohistochemical assessment ability to evaluate estrogen and progesterone receptor status compared with quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction in breast carcinoma patients

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the capability of an automated immunohistochemical (IHC) evaluation of hormonal receptor status in breast cancer patients compared to a well-validated quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) method.

METHODS

This study included 93 invasive breast carcinoma cases that had both standard IHC assay and Oncotype Dx assay results. The same paraffin blocks on which Oncotype Dx assay had been performed were selected. Estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) receptor status were evaluated through IHC stains using SP1 monoclonal antibody for ER, and 1E2 monoclonal antibody for PR. All ER and PR immunostained slides were scanned, and invasive tumor areas were marked. Using the QuantCenter image analyzer provided by 3DHISTECH, IHC staining of hormone receptors was measured and converted to histochemical scores (H scores). Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated between Oncotype Dx hormone receptor scores and H scores, and between Oncotype Dx scores and Allred scores.

RESULTS

H scores measured by an automated imaging system showed high concordance with RT-qPCR scores. ER concordance was 98.9% (92/93), and PR concordance was 91.4% (85/93). The correlation magnitude between automated H scores and RT-qPCR scores was high and comparable to those of Allred scores (for ER, 0.51 vs. 0.37 [p=.121], for PR, 0.70 vs. 0.72 [p=.39]).

CONCLUSIONS

Automated H scores showed a high concordance with quantitative mRNA expression levels measured by RT-qPCR.

Therapeutic role of recurrent ESR1-CCDC170 gene fusions in breast cancer endocrine resistance

Background

Endocrine therapy is the most common treatment for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer, but its effectiveness is limited by high rates of primary and acquired resistance. There are likely many genetic causes, and recent studies suggest the important role of ESR1 mutations and fusions in endocrine resistance. Previously, we reported a recurrent ESR1 fusion called ESR1-CCDC170 in 6–8% of the luminal B breast cancers that has a worse clinical outcome after endocrine therapy. Despite being the most frequent ESR1 fusion, its functional role in endocrine resistance has not been studied in vivo, and the engaged mechanism and therapeutic relevance remain uncharacterized.

Methods

The endocrine sensitivities of HCC1428 or T47D breast cancer cells following genetic perturbations of ESR1-CCDC170 were assessed using clonogenic assays and/or xenograft mouse models. The underlying mechanisms were investigated by reverse phase protein array, western blotting, immunoprecipitation, and bimolecular fluorescence complementation assays. The sensitivity of ESR1-CCDC170 expressing breast cancer cells to concomitant treatments of tamoxifen and HER/SRC inhibitors was assessed by clonogenic assays.

Results

Our results suggested that different ESR1-CCDC170 fusions endow different levels of reduced endocrine sensitivity in vivo, resulting in significant survival disadvantages. Further investigation revealed a novel mechanism that ESR1-CCDC170 binds to HER2/HER3/SRC and activates SRC/PI3K/AKT signaling. Silencing of ESR1-CCDC170 in the fusion-positive cell line, HCC1428, downregulates HER2/HER3, represses pSRC/pAKT, and improves endocrine sensitivity. More important, breast cancer cells expressing ectopic or endogenous ESR1-CCDC170 are highly sensitive to treatment regimens combining endocrine agents with the HER2 inhibitor lapatinib and/or the SRC inhibitor dasatinib.

Conclusion

ESR1-CCDC170 may endow breast cancer cell survival under endocrine therapy via maintaining/activating HER2/HER3/SRC/AKT signaling which implies a potential therapeutic strategy for managing these fusion positive tumors.

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.

Reanalysis of the NCCN PD-L1 companion diagnostic assay study for lung cancer in the context of PD-L1 expression findings in triple-negative breast cancer

The companion diagnostic test for checkpoint inhibitor immune therapy is an immunohistochemical test for PD-L1. The test has been shown to be reproducible for expression in tumor cells, but not in immune cells. Immune cells were used in the IMpassion130 trial which showed PD-L1 expression was associated with a better outcome. Two large studies have been done assessing immune cell PD-L1 expression in lung cancer. Here, we reanalyze one of those studies, to show that, even with an easier scoring method, there is still only poor agreement between assays and pathologist for immune cell PD-L1 expression.