1
|
Goldsmith JD, Troxell ML, Roy-Chowdhuri S, Colasacco CF, Edgerton ME, Fitzgibbons PL, Fulton R, Haas T, Kandalaft PL, Kalicanin T, Lacchetti C, Loykasek P, Thomas NE, Swanson PE, Bellizzi AM. Principles of Analytic Validation of Immunohistochemical Assays: Guideline Update. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2024; 148:e111-e153. [PMID: 38391878 DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2023-0483-cp] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/19/2023] [Indexed: 02/24/2024]
Abstract
CONTEXT.— In 2014, the College of American Pathologists developed an evidence-based guideline to address analytic validation of immunohistochemical assays. Fourteen recommendations were offered. Per the National Academy of Medicine standards for developing trustworthy guidelines, guidelines should be updated when new evidence suggests modifications. OBJECTIVE.— To assess evidence published since the release of the original guideline and develop updated evidence-based recommendations. DESIGN.— The College of American Pathologists convened an expert panel to perform a systematic review of the literature and update the original guideline recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS.— Two strong recommendations, 1 conditional recommendation, and 12 good practice statements are offered in this updated guideline. They address analytic validation or verification of predictive and nonpredictive assays, and recommended revalidation procedures following changes in assay conditions. CONCLUSIONS.— While many of the original guideline statements remain similar, new recommendations address analytic validation of assays with distinct scoring systems, such as programmed death receptor-1 and analytic verification of US Food and Drug Administration approved/cleared assays; more specific guidance is offered for validating immunohistochemistry performed on cytology specimens.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jeffrey D Goldsmith
- From the Department of Pathology, Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (Goldsmith)
| | - Megan L Troxell
- the Department of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California (Troxell)
| | - Sinchita Roy-Chowdhuri
- the Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas (Roy-Chowdhuri)
| | - Carol F Colasacco
- the Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center for Evidence-based Guidelines, College of American Pathologists, Northfield, Illinois (Colasacco, Kalicanin, Thomas)
| | - Mary Elizabeth Edgerton
- the Department of Pathology and Microbiology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska (Edgerton)
| | - Patrick L Fitzgibbons
- the Department of Pathology, Providence St Jude Medical Center, Fullerton, California (Fitzgibbons)
| | - Regan Fulton
- Array Science, LLC, Sausalito, California (Fulton)
| | - Thomas Haas
- Seagull Laboratory Consulting, Janesville, Wisconsin (Haas)
| | | | - Tanja Kalicanin
- the Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center for Evidence-based Guidelines, College of American Pathologists, Northfield, Illinois (Colasacco, Kalicanin, Thomas)
| | - Christina Lacchetti
- Policy and Advocacy, American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, Virginia (Lacchetti)
| | - Patti Loykasek
- Molecular, Immunohistochemistry and Flow Cytometry, Pathology Laboratory Associates, Tulsa, Oklahoma (Loykasek)
| | - Nicole E Thomas
- the Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center for Evidence-based Guidelines, College of American Pathologists, Northfield, Illinois (Colasacco, Kalicanin, Thomas)
| | - Paul E Swanson
- the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, Washington (Swanson)
| | - Andrew M Bellizzi
- the Department of Pathology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa (Bellizzi)
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
HER2 immunohistochemistry staining positivity is strongly predictive of tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HER2 positive breast cancer. Pathol Res Pract 2020; 216:153155. [PMID: 32871536 DOI: 10.1016/j.prp.2020.153155] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/03/2020] [Revised: 07/30/2020] [Accepted: 08/01/2020] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The current recommendation is to reflex test HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) equivocal breast cancer cases with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis. Either IHC 3+ or FISH positive cancers are considered HER2 positive (HER2+) and treated with HER2 targeted therapy. This study examined the predictive value of HER IHC or FISH positivity in tumor response to HER2 targeted therapy. METHODS Biopsies of 76 HER2+ breast cancer cases were evaluated. All patients were treated with neoadjuvant HER2 targeted therapy and chemotherapy. Tumor response was evaluated on the excisional specimens. Cancers with complete pathologic response (pCR) or MD Anderson residual cancer burden-I (RCB-I) were classified as responders and cancers with RCB-II/III as non-responders. Clinicopathologic parameters were correlated with response. RESULTS In univariate analysis, small tumor size, low nuclear grade, high Ki67, HER2 IHC 3+, homogenous strong HER2 IHC staining, high HER2/CEP17 ratio, and high HER2 copy number were significantly associated with pCR/RCB-I. In multivariate analysis, homogenous strong HER2 IHC staining pattern was significantly associated with pCR/RCB-I. The receiver operating characteristics (ROC) model showed either high HER2/CEP17 ratio or HER2 copy number individually was predictive of tumor response. CONCLUSION HER2 IHC staining pattern is significantly associated with tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, reiterating the importance of HER2 IHC evaluation. The ROC model shows either high HER2/CEP17 ratio or high HER2 copy number individually is predictive of tumor response to neoadjuvant HER2 targeted therapy in HER2+ breast cancer.
Collapse
|
3
|
He Z, Chen Z, Tan M, Elingarami S, Liu Y, Li T, Deng Y, He N, Li S, Fu J, Li W. A review on methods for diagnosis of breast cancer cells and tissues. Cell Prolif 2020; 53:e12822. [PMID: 32530560 PMCID: PMC7377933 DOI: 10.1111/cpr.12822] [Citation(s) in RCA: 59] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2019] [Revised: 03/10/2020] [Accepted: 03/30/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer has seriously been threatening physical and mental health of women in the world, and its morbidity and mortality also show clearly upward trend in China over time. Through inquiry, we find that survival rate of patients with early‐stage breast cancer is significantly higher than those with middle‐ and late‐stage breast cancer, hence, it is essential to conduct research to quickly diagnose breast cancer. Until now, many methods for diagnosing breast cancer have been developed, mainly based on imaging and molecular biotechnology examination. These methods have great contributions in screening and confirmation of breast cancer. In this review article, we introduce and elaborate the advances of these methods, and then conclude some gold standard diagnostic methods for certain breast cancer patients. We lastly discuss how to choose the most suitable diagnostic methods for breast cancer patients. In general, this article not only summarizes application and development of these diagnostic methods, but also provides the guidance for researchers who work on diagnosis of breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ziyu He
- Hunan Key Laboratory of Biomedical Nanomaterials and Devices, Hunan University of Technology, Zhuzhou, China
| | - Zhu Chen
- Hunan Key Laboratory of Biomedical Nanomaterials and Devices, Hunan University of Technology, Zhuzhou, China.,State Key Laboratory of Bioelectronics, School of Biological and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, China
| | - Miduo Tan
- Surgery Department of Galactophore, Central Hospital of Zhuzhou City, Zhuzhou, China
| | - Sauli Elingarami
- School of Life Sciences and Bioengineering (LiSBE), The Nelson Mandela African Institution of Science and Technology (NM-AIST), Arusha, Tanzania
| | - Yuan Liu
- Hunan Key Laboratory of Biomedical Nanomaterials and Devices, Hunan University of Technology, Zhuzhou, China.,State Key Laboratory of Bioelectronics, School of Biological and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, China
| | - Taotao Li
- Hunan Provincial Key Lab of Dark Tea and Jin-hua, School of Materials and Chemical Engineering, Hunan City University, Yiyang, China
| | - Yan Deng
- Hunan Key Laboratory of Biomedical Nanomaterials and Devices, Hunan University of Technology, Zhuzhou, China
| | - Nongyue He
- Hunan Key Laboratory of Biomedical Nanomaterials and Devices, Hunan University of Technology, Zhuzhou, China.,State Key Laboratory of Bioelectronics, School of Biological and Medical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, China
| | - Song Li
- Hunan Key Laboratory of Biomedical Nanomaterials and Devices, Hunan University of Technology, Zhuzhou, China
| | - Juan Fu
- School of Medicine, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
| | - Wen Li
- Hunan Key Laboratory of Biomedical Nanomaterials and Devices, Hunan University of Technology, Zhuzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|