Cargando…
Assessing the discordance rate between local and central HER2 testing in women with locally determined HER2-negative breast cancer
BACKGROUND: The importance of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) as a prognostic and predictive marker in invasive breast cancer is well established. Accurate assessment of HER2 status is essential to determine optimal treatment options. METHODS: Breast cancer tumor tissue samples from...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4232097/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24930388 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28710 |
_version_ | 1782344526608728064 |
---|---|
author | Kaufman, Peter A Bloom, Kenneth J Burris, Howard Gralow, Julie R Mayer, Musa Pegram, Mark Rugo, Hope S Swain, Sandra M Yardley, Denise A Chau, Miu Lalla, Deepa Yoo, Bongin Brammer, Melissa G Vogel, Charles L |
author_facet | Kaufman, Peter A Bloom, Kenneth J Burris, Howard Gralow, Julie R Mayer, Musa Pegram, Mark Rugo, Hope S Swain, Sandra M Yardley, Denise A Chau, Miu Lalla, Deepa Yoo, Bongin Brammer, Melissa G Vogel, Charles L |
author_sort | Kaufman, Peter A |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The importance of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) as a prognostic and predictive marker in invasive breast cancer is well established. Accurate assessment of HER2 status is essential to determine optimal treatment options. METHODS: Breast cancer tumor tissue samples from the VIRGO observational cohort tissue substudy that were locally HER2-negative were retested centrally with both US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assays, using FDA-approved assay cutoffs; results were compared. RESULTS: Of the 552 unique patient samples centrally retested with local HER2-negative results recorded, tumor samples from 22 (4.0%) patients were determined to be HER2-positive (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.5%-5.7%). Of these, 18 had been tested locally by only one testing methodology; 15 of 18 were HER2-positive after the central retesting, based on the testing methodology not performed locally. Compared with the 530 patients with centrally confirmed HER2-negative tumors, the 22 patients with centrally determined HER2-positive tumors were younger (median age 56.5 versus 60.0 years) and more likely to have ER/PR-negative tumors (27.3% versus 22.3%). These patients also had shorter median progression-free survival (6.4 months [95% CI = 3.8-15.9 months] versus 9.1 months [95% CI = 8.3-10.3 months]) and overall survival (25.9 months [95% CI = 13.8-not estimable] versus 27.9 months [95% CI = 25.0-32.9 months]). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the limitations of employing just one HER2 testing methodology in current clinical practice. It identifies a cohort of patients who did not receive potentially efficacious therapy because their tumor HER2-positivity was not determined by the test initially used. Because of inherent limitations in testing methodologies, it is inadvisable to rely on a single test to rule out potential benefit from HER2-targeted therapy. Cancer 2014;120:2657–2664. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4232097 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Wiley Periodicals, Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42320972014-12-15 Assessing the discordance rate between local and central HER2 testing in women with locally determined HER2-negative breast cancer Kaufman, Peter A Bloom, Kenneth J Burris, Howard Gralow, Julie R Mayer, Musa Pegram, Mark Rugo, Hope S Swain, Sandra M Yardley, Denise A Chau, Miu Lalla, Deepa Yoo, Bongin Brammer, Melissa G Vogel, Charles L Cancer Original Articles BACKGROUND: The importance of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) as a prognostic and predictive marker in invasive breast cancer is well established. Accurate assessment of HER2 status is essential to determine optimal treatment options. METHODS: Breast cancer tumor tissue samples from the VIRGO observational cohort tissue substudy that were locally HER2-negative were retested centrally with both US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assays, using FDA-approved assay cutoffs; results were compared. RESULTS: Of the 552 unique patient samples centrally retested with local HER2-negative results recorded, tumor samples from 22 (4.0%) patients were determined to be HER2-positive (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.5%-5.7%). Of these, 18 had been tested locally by only one testing methodology; 15 of 18 were HER2-positive after the central retesting, based on the testing methodology not performed locally. Compared with the 530 patients with centrally confirmed HER2-negative tumors, the 22 patients with centrally determined HER2-positive tumors were younger (median age 56.5 versus 60.0 years) and more likely to have ER/PR-negative tumors (27.3% versus 22.3%). These patients also had shorter median progression-free survival (6.4 months [95% CI = 3.8-15.9 months] versus 9.1 months [95% CI = 8.3-10.3 months]) and overall survival (25.9 months [95% CI = 13.8-not estimable] versus 27.9 months [95% CI = 25.0-32.9 months]). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the limitations of employing just one HER2 testing methodology in current clinical practice. It identifies a cohort of patients who did not receive potentially efficacious therapy because their tumor HER2-positivity was not determined by the test initially used. Because of inherent limitations in testing methodologies, it is inadvisable to rely on a single test to rule out potential benefit from HER2-targeted therapy. Cancer 2014;120:2657–2664. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 2014-09-01 2014-06-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4232097/ /pubmed/24930388 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28710 Text en © 2014 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Kaufman, Peter A Bloom, Kenneth J Burris, Howard Gralow, Julie R Mayer, Musa Pegram, Mark Rugo, Hope S Swain, Sandra M Yardley, Denise A Chau, Miu Lalla, Deepa Yoo, Bongin Brammer, Melissa G Vogel, Charles L Assessing the discordance rate between local and central HER2 testing in women with locally determined HER2-negative breast cancer |
title | Assessing the discordance rate between local and central HER2 testing in women with locally determined HER2-negative breast cancer |
title_full | Assessing the discordance rate between local and central HER2 testing in women with locally determined HER2-negative breast cancer |
title_fullStr | Assessing the discordance rate between local and central HER2 testing in women with locally determined HER2-negative breast cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessing the discordance rate between local and central HER2 testing in women with locally determined HER2-negative breast cancer |
title_short | Assessing the discordance rate between local and central HER2 testing in women with locally determined HER2-negative breast cancer |
title_sort | assessing the discordance rate between local and central her2 testing in women with locally determined her2-negative breast cancer |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4232097/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24930388 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28710 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kaufmanpetera assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT bloomkennethj assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT burrishoward assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT gralowjulier assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT mayermusa assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT pegrammark assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT rugohopes assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT swainsandram assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT yardleydenisea assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT chaumiu assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT lalladeepa assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT yoobongin assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT brammermelissag assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer AT vogelcharlesl assessingthediscordanceratebetweenlocalandcentralher2testinginwomenwithlocallydeterminedher2negativebreastcancer |