Oestrogen receptor analysis of paraffin sections and cytosol samples of primary breast cancer in relation to outcome after adjuvant tamoxifen treatment. The South Sweden Breast Cancer Group

Estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. The majority of breast cancers show overexpression of estrogen receptors (ERs) and progesterone receptors (PRs). The development of drugs to target these hormone receptors, such as tamoxifen, has brought about significant improvement in survival for women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancers. Since information about ER and PR is vital for patient management, quality assurance is important to ensure accurate testing. In recent guidelines, the recommended definition of ER and PR positivity is 1% or more of cells that stain positive. Semiquantitative assessment of ER and PR is important for prognosis and, hence, management. Even with the development of genomic tests, hormone receptor status remains the most significant predictive and prognostic biomarker.

The prevalence of immunohistochemically determined oestrogen receptor positivity in primary breast cancer is dependent on the choice of antibody and method of heat-induced epitope retrieval - prognostic implications?

BACKGROUND

Oestrogen receptor (ER) status is important for the choice of systemic treatment of breast cancer patients. However, most data from randomised trials on the effect of adjuvant endocrine therapy according to ER status are based on the cytosol methods. Comparisons with immunohistochemical methods have given similar results. The aim of the present study was to examine whether different ER antibodies and heat-induced epitope retrieval (HIER) methods influence the prevalence of ER-positivity in primary breast cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study is based on patients included in a clinical trial designed to compare the effect of two years of adjuvant tamoxifen versus no adjuvant systemic treatment in premenopausal women. From 1986 to 1991, 564 patients from two study centres in Sweden were enrolled and randomised. Patients were randomised independently of ER status. In the present study, ER status was assessed on tissue microarrays with the three different ER antibody/HIER combinations: 1D5 in citrate pH 6 (n = 390), SP1 in Tris pH 9 (n = 390) and PharmDx in citrate pH 6 (n = 361).

RESULTS

At cut-offs of 1% and 10%, respectively, the prevalence of ER-positivity was higher with SP1 (75% and 72%) compared with 1D5 (68% and 66%) and PharmDx (66% and 62%). At these cut-offs, patients in the discordant groups (SP1-positive and 1D5-negative) seem to have a prognosis intermediate between those of the double-positive and double-negative groups. Comparison with the ER status determined by the cytosol-based methods in the discordant group also showed an intermediate pattern. The repeatability was good for all antibodies and cut-offs, with overall agreement ≥ 93%.

CONCLUSION

The present study shows that the choice of antibody and HIER method influences the prevalence of ER-positivity. We suggest that this be taken into consideration when choosing a cut-off for clinical decision making.

Systematic review on hormone receptor testing in breast cancer

Assessment of hormone receptors (estrogen and progesterone) helps to direct therapy for women with breast cancer. Immunohistochemistry is most commonly used to assess hormone receptor status and it is essential that these tests are performed accurately and reliably within and across laboratories. The overall purpose of this guideline is to improve the quality and accuracy of hormone receptor testing and its utility as a prognostic and predictive marker for invasive and in situ breast cancer. Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and abstracts from the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium were searched. An environmental scan of the internet and of international guideline developers and key organizations was performed. Preanalytic elements such as the collection, fixation, and storage of samples, and analytic elements such as selection of antibodies and scoring methods that seem to offer the best results for immunohistochemical assessment of hormone receptors are presented. Proficiency testing or quality assurance of immunohistochemistry is described.

A critical review why assessment of steroid hormone receptors in breast cancer should be quantitative

Steroid receptors have been around in the field of breast cancer for decades now. Still, controversy remains on how best to report steroid receptors. In this review, we will convince the reader why benefits outweigh pitfalls, when reporting steroid receptors in a quantitative rather than qualitative way. Summarizing decades of research in this field, we will explore the evidence why quantitative reporting is superior in all settings (neoadjuvant, adjuvant and metastatic settings). Furthermore, we will also summarize different staining methods, definitions and pitfalls that have shown to be important points of discussion in earlier debates. Although the molecular unraveling of breast cancer in the past decade has revolutionized the way we think about breast cancer, we should not easily abandon the classical pathological variables such as steroid receptors in favor of molecular tools.

Cancer care Ontario guideline recommendations for hormone receptor testing in breast cancer

Hormone receptor testing (oestrogen and progesterone) in breast cancer at the time of primary diagnosis is used to guide treatment decisions. Accurate and standardised testing methods are critical to ensure the proper classification of the patient's hormone receptor status. Recommendations were developed to improve the quality and accuracy of hormone receptor testing based on a systematic review conducted jointly by the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists and Cancer Care Ontario's Program in Evidence-Based Care. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated to set standards for optimising immunohistochemistry in assessing hormone receptor status, as well as assuring quality and proficiency between and within laboratories. A formal external review was conducted to validate the relevance of these recommendations. It is anticipated that widespread adoption of these guidelines will further improve the accuracy of hormone receptor testing in Canada.

Immunohistochemistry compared to cytosol assays for determination of estrogen receptor and prediction of the long-term effect of adjuvant tamoxifen

The purpose of this study is to compare immunohistochemistry (IHC) and cytosol-based assays for determination of estrogen receptor (ER) and prediction of response to adjuvant tamoxifen treatment in postmenopausal women with early-stage invasive breast cancer. The Stockholm Breast Cancer Study Group conducted a randomized trial during 1976 through 1990 comparing adjuvant tamoxifen versus control. The patients were stratified according to tumor size and lymph node status in high-risk and low-risk groups. In this study we evaluated 683 patients with "low risk" breast cancer (size ≤30 mm, lymph node-negative) for whom ER status had been determined by both the cytosol assays and IHC at one pathology laboratory. The median follow-up was 17 years. Six hundred eighty-three patients had tumors with ER determined by both methods, 536 (78.5%) were ER-positive by cytosol assays using the cutoff level at ≥0.05 fmol/μg DNA and 539 patients were ER-positive (79%) by IHC using the cutoff level at ≥10% cell stained. Thirty-nine tumors (5.7%) were ER-positive by cytosol but not by IHC, whereas the opposite pattern was found for 42 cases (6.1%). Only seven tumors had stained cells between 0 and 9% by IHC. The concordance between IHC and cytosol assays was high (88%). The kappa statistic was 0.65, 95% CI 0.58-0.72. Among patients classified as ER-negative no therapeutic benefit from tamoxifen was observed. Among patients with ER-expressing tumors, tamoxifen resulted in significantly better recurrence-free survival irrespective of the method (IHC: HR, 0.53, P < 0.001; cytosol: HR, 0.53, P < 0.001). The effect on overall survival was not statistically significant probably due to the limited sample size. Both IHC and cytosol assay accurately predict long-term response to adjuvant tamoxifen.

Immunohistochemical evaluation of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 and estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast carcinoma in Jordan

Introduction

Although breast carcinoma (BC) is the most common malignancy affecting Jordanian females and the affected population in Jordan is younger than that in the West, no information is available on its biological characteristics. Our aims in this study are to evaluate the expression of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) and Her-2/neu overexpression in BC in Jordan, and to compare the expression of these with other prognostic parameters for BC such as histological type, histological grade, tumor size, patients' age, and number of lymph node metastases.

Method

This is a retrospective study conducted in the Department of Pathology at Jordan University of Science and Technology. A confirmed 91 cases of BC diagnosed in the period 1995 to 1998 were reviewed and graded. We used immunohistochemistry to evaluate the expression of ER, PR, and Her-2. Immunohistochemical findings were correlated with age, tumor size, grade and axillary lymph node status.

Results

Her-2 was overexpressed in 24% of the cases. The mean age of Her-2 positive cases was 42 years as opposed to 53 years among Her-2 negative cases (p = 0.0001). Her-2 expression was inversely related to ER and PR expression. Her-2 positive tumors tended to be larger than Her-2 negative tumors with 35% overexpression among T3 tumors as opposed to 22% among T2 tumors (p = 0.13). Her-2 positive cases tended to have higher rates of axillary metastases, but this did not reach statistical significance. ER and PR positive cases were seen in older patients with smaller tumor sizes.

Conclusion

Her-2 overexpression was seen in 24% of BC affecting Jordanian females. Her-2 overexpression was associated with young age at presentation, larger tumor size, and was inversely related to ER and PR expression. One-fifth of the carcinomas were Her-2 positive and ER negative. This group appears to represent an aggressive form of BC presenting at a young age with large primary tumors and a high rate of four or more axillary lymph node metastases.

Solving the dilemma of the immunohistochemical and other methods used for scoring estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor in patients with invasive breast carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The authors attempted to resolve the dilemma posed by the lack of unanimity concerning the optimal immunohistochemical (IHC) method for determining and scoring estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR).

METHODS

Sections for IHC were prepared from paraffin embedded tumor samples from 402 patients with lymph node positive breast carcinoma who had biochemical receptor values (obtained with the dextran-coated charcoal [DCC] method) and who were enrolled in a prospective, randomized trial (National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project protocol B-09). IHC receptors were scored independently by two observers according to percent, intensity, and any-or-none algorithms. Results from these evaluations and from two computer-assisted evaluations, DCC, and common pathologic characteristics were analyzed for optimum splits for positive reactions in univariate and multivariate analyses using a tree-structured model. Concordance, sensitivity, and specificity were determined between the DCC method and all other methods.

RESULTS

Interobserver agreement and concordance between the DCC method and the other methods and among the methods were high. Univariate analyses revealed that a positive ER score obtained with all methods was related significantly to overall survival (OS) at 5 years and at 10 years. Results related to PR scores and disease-free survival and recurrence-free survival were less consistent. In multivariate analysis, it also was found that all methods for scoring ER predicted a better prognosis for OS in patients with an unfavorable lymph node status at 5 years and 10 years. Patients in a favorable lymph node status group were discriminated further by nuclear grade.

CONCLUSIONS

All IHC methods for scoring ER appeared valid as prognostic indicators of OS in patients with positive lymph nodes. The any-or-none IHC method, by virtue of its simplicity, represents an appropriate choice for practical use.

Worse survival in breast cancer among women with recent childbirth: results from a Swedish population-based register study

This study was designed to investigate how time since childbirth affects breast cancer survival using unselected population-based data linking data from the Swedish Cancer Registry, fertility register, and population census registers. A total of 14,693 parous women < or =45 years of age with breast cancer were identified. Information on deaths was collected, and 5- and 10-year survival rates were calculated according to time since most recent childbirth. Mortality during the first 10 years of follow-up was further investigated in a Cox analysis, with adjustments for age at diagnosis, time period during which the diagnosis was made, number of children, and age at the time of the first child's birth. Women with diagnosis during pregnancy had a 5-year survival rate of 52.1% (95% CI, 41.2%-61.9%) and a 10-year survival rate of 43.9% (95% CI, 33.1%-54.2%), compared with survival rates of 80.0% (95% CI, 79.6%-81.4%) and 68.6% (95% CI, 67.5%-69.7%), respectively, in women diagnosed >10 years since childbirth. In the multivariate model, we found that time since childbirth was associated with inferior survival rates in cases of diagnosis <8 years after childbirth, in which the lowest survival rates were seen in women with diagnosis during pregnancy in the first 5 years of follow-up (adjusted relative risk compared with women with >10 years since last childbirth, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.8-3.4). The adjusted hazard ratios could be described by a decreasing function of a logarithmic transformation of years since childbirth. We found that the time of follow-up was of importance, in that women with a recent pregnancy had particularly lower survival rates during the first 5 years after diagnosis. The mechanisms behind the poor survival in breast cancer for women with recent childbirth are not known, but we suggest that one explanation might be a lower proportion of hormone receptor-positive tumors.

Hormone receptor status in breast cancer--a comparison between surgical specimens and fine needle aspiration biopsies

The present study was performed to evaluate the immunocytochemical analysis (ICA) of oestrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) in fine needle aspiration (FNA) biopsies from primary breast cancers as compared with the established enzyme immunoassays (ER-EIA and PR-EIA) based on cytosol homogenates from the corresponding resected tumour specimens. A total of 967 primary breast cancers were assessed for ER and PR content by both methods. Correlations between EIA and ICA expressed as percentage of tumour cells with a positive staining were highly significant (P < 0.001) for ER and PR. Staining intensity yielded only limited additional information. The concordance between the two techniques was about 80%. Evaluation of biological parameters by FNA may be useful to decide the optimal treatment for breast cancer patients.

Steroid Hormone Receptor Immunohistochemistry in Breast Cancer: Past, Present, and Future

This article reviews the development of steroid hormone receptor detection using the biochemical approach and the disadvantages inherent in these systems. The early history of methods for the in situ detection of receptors is related, culminating in the development of histologic immunoassays using monoclonal antibodies. Correlation of the latter with disease-free and overall survival and with clinical endocrine response are presented together with preliminary findings utilizing a new generation of antireceptor antibodies. Current problems with test scoring and interpretation are detailed with a section devoted to image analysis for assay quantification. Emphasis is placed on the fact that because so many different antibodies and tissue substrates have been employed in the past, these histologic receptor immunoassays cannot yet be considered to be fully validated. It is stressed that different laboratories must employ the same antibodies, substrates, detection systems and methods of scoring, and then correlate findings with measurable clinical end points. Only then can the assays be included in the brief list of approved breast cancer prognostic and predictive markers to eventually replace the routine biochemical methods of steroid receptor detection.

Comparison of enzyme immunoassay and immunohistochemical measurements of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer patients

Before replacing enzyme immunoassay of estrogen and progesterone receptors by immunohistochemistry, results of both methods were compared on 437 samples obtained from breast cancer patients (342 primary breast carcinomas, 16 local recurrences, 49 biopsies, and 30 tumor specimens obtained after neoadjuvant treatment). Immunohistochemistry (IHC) results were first assessed semiquantitatively on the basis of the estimated proportion of positive tumor cells, and then quantitatively using the "quick score." Semiquantitative IHC hormone receptors results (positive > or = 10%) correlated well with enzyme immunoassay status (positive >15 fmol/mg protein) in 358 surgical samples (342 primary tumors and 16 recurrences), with overall concordance rates of 89.9% and 82.1%, respectively. Among the 100 discordant cases, a large intraductal carcinoma component was observed in 7 of 36 cases for estrogen receptor (ER) and 15 of 64 for progesterone receptor (PR). Thirty-five discordant cases also were observed near the cut-off values. Hormone receptor levels by enzyme immunoassay correlated strongly with the quantitative IHC "quick score." Whatever the method, hormone receptor status was associated with histologic grade (SBR) and tumor size, whereas age correlated strongly with ER positivity. Similar results were obtained for biopsy specimens and posttreatment samples. This comparison improved the reliability of the IHC technique, which is currently routinely used for ER and PR determination in the authors' institution.

Study of interlaboratory reliability and reproducibility of estrogen and progesterone receptor assays in Europe. Documentation of poor reliability and identification of insufficient microwave antigen retrieval time as a major contributory element of unreliable assays

Immunohistochemical assays for estrogen receptors (ERs) and progesterone receptors (PRs) have not been surveyed for technical validity. In the present study, the reliability of the immunohistochemical assay for ER and PR was evaluated using data from 105 laboratories participating in external quality assessment (EQA) during a 2-year period. Technical variables associated with reliable immunostaining were analyzed. The efficiency of the antigen retrieval step was identified as the single most important contributory factor influencing the overall reproducibility of the assays. Reliable assays were found in 24 (36%) of 66 laboratories participating in continual EQA, including the majority of centers known to have clinically validated results. Inadequate assay sensitivity, with subsequent weak staining, was the main cause of poor and variable results by laboratories using microwave antigen retrieval; too short a heating time was identified as the principal contributory factor. Extension of the heating time resulted in significant improvement regardless of all other variables in the immunohistochemical protocol. Continual participation in EQA is an effective means for identifying and ameliorating variables that influence the reliability of immunohistochemical assays for predictive markers, thereby assisting in technical validation and standardization.

Frequency of oestrogen and progesterone receptor positivity by immunohistochemical analysis in 7016 breast carcinomas: correlation with patient age, assay sensitivity, threshold value, and mammographic screening

AIMS

A routine immunohistochemical (IHC) assay is now commonly used for determining the oestrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) status of women with breast cancer. To date, no large studies have been conducted that report the expected frequency of receptor positivity in relation to patient age and sensitivity of the IHC assay. Data on 7016 breast carcinomas from 71 laboratories were analysed to determine the frequency of receptor positivity and investigate possible causes of the observed variation in detection rates.

METHODS

Members of UK NEQAS-ICC (UK National External Quality Assessment Scheme for Immunocytochemistry) provided data on the receptor status of cases routinely assayed in their departments over a period of two to 26 months between June 1996 and September 1998. Data on 7016 breast carcinomas were stratified according to patient age and receptor status. Frequency of receptor positivity was correlated with IHC assay sensitivity, the threshold value used to determine receptor positivity, and the presence or absence of mammographic screening in the hospitals or clinics served by the laboratories.

RESULTS

The highest proportion of receptor positive cases occurred in patients in the age ranges > 65 years for ER and 41-50 years for PR. There was a significant positive correlation between frequency of receptor positivity and the sensitivity of the IHC assay, for both ER (rs = 0.346; p = 0.019; two tailed) and PR (rs = 0.561; p = 0.003; two tailed). The mean frequency of receptor positivity for laboratories using the same 10% threshold value was 77% for ER (95% confidence interval (CI), 74% to 80%) in laboratories with high sensitivity and 72% (95% CI, 68% to 76%) for those with low assay sensitivity (p = 0.025). For PR, the mean frequency of receptor positivity for laboratories using the same 10% threshold value and having high assay sensitivity was 63% (95% CI, 57% to 69%), and 51% (95% CI, 38% to 65%) for laboratories with assays of low sensitivity (p = 0.022). The mean frequency of ER positivity for laboratories serving hospitals and clinics where mammographic screening does and does not take place was 73.4% and 75.7%, respectively (p = 0.302; two tailed).

CONCLUSIONS

Of the parameters investigated, patient age and IHC assay sensitivity were found to be the main variables influencing the frequency of receptor positivity. We recommend the range of receptor values obtained by laboratories achieving high assay sensitivity as a useful guide against which all laboratories can gauge their own results.

Immunohistochemical demonstration of oestrogen and progesterone receptors: correlation of standards achieved on in house tumours with that achieved on external quality assessment material in over 150 laboratories from 26 countries

AIMS

To investigate the sensitivity of immunohistochemical (IHC) assays for oestrogen receptors (ER) and progesterone receptors (PR) achieved by laboratories on breast tumours fixed and processed in their own department, and to compare this with the degree of sensitivity they achieve on tumours circulated as part of an external quality assessment (EQA) programme.

METHODS

On 10 occasions between April 1994 and June 1998, histological sections from breast cancers showing various degrees of expression of ER and PR were circulated for IHC staining to laboratories participating in the UK national external quality assessment scheme for immunocytochemistry (UK NEQAS-ICC). The staining of these tumours, in addition to that of tumours fixed and processed in the participants own laboratories (in house tumours), was assessed by a panel of four assessors, using the established UK NEQAS-ICC scoring system. For a selected assessment run, the degree of expression of participants in house tumours was evaluated by means of the semiquantitative quick score method.

RESULTS

Although the scores awarded for the staining of in house tumours were generally higher than those awarded for the staining of UK NEQAS tumours, there was also a significant positive correlation between the two sets of scores. Using the quick score method of evaluation for one of the assessment runs, 47% of in house tumours were classified as having a high degree of ER expression. Of the remaining cases, a significant proportion initially classified as having only low or medium expression of ER were found to have higher expression when stained by the organising laboratory. The UK NEQAS-ICC centre's routine assay for hormonal receptors was found to be 90-100% efficient in achieving optimal demonstration of breast tumours from over 150 different laboratories.

CONCLUSIONS

The significant positive correlation between the results obtained on the UK NEQAS tumours and the in house tumours provides evidence for the view that results achieved on EQA material are accurate indicators of in house laboratory performance. Although most laboratories adequately detected tumours with high receptor expression, a large proportion of in house tumours classified initially by participants' staining as being of low or medium ER expression had a higher degree of expression when stained by the UK NEQAS-ICC centre. The efficiency of the organising centre's routine IHC method for ER and PR in optimally demonstrating participants in house breast tumours shows that variations in fixation and tissue preparation are not limiting factors preventing a different laboratory achieving optimal demonstration.

Reliability of immunohistochemical demonstration of oestrogen receptors in routine practice: interlaboratory variance in the sensitivity of detection and evaluation of scoring systems

AIMS

To investigate interlaboratory variance in the immunohistochemical (IHC) detection of oestrogen receptors so as to determine the rate of false negatives, which could adversely influence the decision to give adjuvant tamoxifen treatment.

METHODS

To ensure that similar results are obtained by different institutions, 200 laboratories from 26 countries have joined the UK national external quality assessment scheme for immunocytochemistry (NEQAS-ICC). Histological sections from breast cancers having low, medium, and high levels of oestrogen receptor expression were sent to each of the laboratories for immunohistochemical staining. The results obtained were evaluated for the sensitivity of detection, first by estimating threshold values of 1% and 10% of stained tumour cells, and second by the Quick score method, by a panel of four assessors judging individual sections independently on a single blind basis. The results were also evaluated using participants' own threshold values.

RESULTS

Over 80% of laboratories were able to demonstrate oestrogen receptor positivity on the medium and high expressing tumours, but only 37% of laboratories scored adequately on the low expressing tumour. Approximately one third of laboratories failed to register any positive staining in this tumour, while one third showed only minimal positivity.

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable interlaboratory variability, especially in relation to the detection of breast cancers with low oestrogen receptor positivity, with a false negative rate of between 30% and 60%. This variability appears to be caused by minor differences in methodology that may be rectified by fine adjustment of overall technique.

Estrogen receptor status by immunohistochemistry is superior to the ligand-binding assay for predicting response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer

PURPOSE

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a newer technique for assessing the estrogen receptor (ER) status of breast cancers, with the potential to overcome many of the shortcomings associated with the traditional ligand-binding assay (LBA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of ER status determination by IHC, compared with LBA, to predict clinical outcome-especially response to adjuvant endocrine therapy-in a large number of patients with long-term clinical follow-up.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ER status was evaluated in 1,982 primary breast cancers by IHC on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue sections, using antibody 6F11 and standard methodology. Slides were scored on a scale representing the estimated proportion and intensity of positive-staining tumor cells (range, 0 to 8). Results were compared with ER values obtained by the LBA in the same tumors and to clinical outcome.

RESULTS

An IHC score of greater than 2 (corresponding to as few as 1% to 10% weakly positive cells) was used to define ER positivity on the basis of a univariate cut-point analysis of all possible scores and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients receiving any adjuvant endocrine therapy. Using this definition, 71% of all tumors were determined to be ER-positive by IHC, and the level of agreement with the LBA was 86%. In multivariate analyses of patients receiving adjuvant endocrine therapy alone, ER status determined by IHC was better than that determined by the LBA at predicting improved DFS (hazard ratios/P = 0.474/.0008 and 0.707/.3214, respectively) and equivalent at predicting overall survival (0.379/.0001 and 0.381/.0003, respectively).

CONCLUSION

IHC is superior to the LBA for assessing ER status in primary breast cancer because it is easier, safer, and less expensive, and has an equivalent or better ability to predict response to adjuvant endocrine therapy.

Increased use of immunohistochemistry for oestrogen receptor measurement in mammary carcinoma: the need for quality assurance

This paper outlines the changes which have occurred over the last 25 years in the methods employed for the measurement of oestrogen receptors to aid the management of women with breast cancer. Immunohistochemistry is now the method of choice and knowledge of oestrogen receptor status is being used with increasing frequency for the selection of adjuvant treatment as well as for the treatment of metastatic disease. It is essential that good quality assurance procedures are established so that results are reproducible and can be used with confidence in individual centres as well as being comparable with those produced elsewhere. A retrospective study of 170 women with metastatic breast cancer provides the basis for a discussion on the advantages and pitfalls of the immunohistochemical assay. Particular emphasis is paid to the choice of cut-off and how the results may be applied in patient management.