Inter-observer reproducibility of HER2 immunohistochemical assessment and concordance with fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH): pathologist assessment compared to quantitative image analysis

BackgroundIn breast cancer patients, HER2 overexpression is routinely assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and equivocal cases are subject to fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). Our study compares HER2 scoring by histopathologists with automated quantitation of staining, and determines the concordance of IHC scores with FISH results.MethodsA tissue microarray was constructed from 1,212 invasive breast carcinoma cases with linked treatment and outcome information. IHC slides were semi-quantitatively scored by two independent pathologists on a range of 0 to 3+, and also analyzed with an Ariol automated system by two operators. 616 cases were scorable by both IHC and FISH.ResultsUsing data from unequivocal positive (3+) or negative (0, 1+) results, both visual and automated scores were highly consistent: there was excellent concordance between two pathologists (kappa = 1.000, 95% CI: 1-1), between two machines (kappa = 1.000, 95% CI: 1-1), and between both visual and both machine scores (kappa = 0.898, 95% CI: 0.775–0.979). Two pathologists successfully distinguished negative, positive and equivocal cases (kappa = 0.929, 95% CI: 0.909–0.946), with excellent agreement with machine 1 scores (kappa = 0.835, 95% CI: 0.806–0.862; kappa = 0.837, 95% CI: 0.81–0.862), and good agreement with machine 2 scores (kappa = 0.698, 95% CI: 0.6723–0.723; kappa = 0.709, 95% CI: 0.684–0.732), whereas the two machines showed good agreement (kappa = 0.806, 95% CI: 0.785–0.826). When comparing categorized IHC scores and FISH results, the agreement was excellent for visual 1 (kappa = 0.814, 95% CI: 0.768–0.856), good for visual 2 (kappa = 0.763, 95% CI: 0.712–0.81) and machine 1 (kappa = 0.665, 95% CI: 0.609–0.718), and moderate for machine 2 (kappa = 0.535, 95% CI: 0.485–0.584).ConclusionA fully automated image analysis system run by an experienced operator can provide results consistent with visual HER2 scoring. Further development of such systems will likely improve the accuracy of detection and categorization of membranous staining, making this technique suitable for use in quality assurance programs and eventually in clinical practice.

[1]  Yasodha Natkunam,et al.  TMA-Combiner, a simple software tool to permit analysis of replicate cores on tissue microarrays , 2005, Modern Pathology.

[2]  H A Lehr,et al.  Quantitative evaluation of HER-2/neu status in breast cancer by fluorescence in situ hybridization and by immunohistochemistry with image analysis. , 2001, American journal of clinical pathology.

[3]  C. Pipper,et al.  [''R"--project for statistical computing]. , 2008, Ugeskrift for laeger.

[4]  K. Edmiston,et al.  HER-2 Status in Breast Cancer: Correlation of Gene Amplification by FISH With Immunohistochemistry Expression Using Advanced Cellular Imaging System , 2006, Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM.

[5]  T. Grogan,et al.  A New Rabbit Monoclonal Antibody (4B5) for the Immunohistochemical (IHC) Determination of the HER2 Status in Breast Cancer: Comparison With CB11, Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH), and Interlaboratory Reproducibility , 2007, Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM.

[6]  J. Kononen,et al.  Tissue microarrays for high-throughput molecular profiling of tumor specimens , 1998, Nature Medicine.

[7]  A. Paradiso,et al.  The use of cell line standards to reduce HER-2/neu assay variation in multiple European cancer centers and the potential of automated image analysis to provide for more accurate cut points for predicting clinical response to trastuzumab. , 2004, American journal of clinical pathology.

[8]  M. Hung,et al.  Dysregulation of cellular signaling by HER2/neu in breast cancer. , 2003, Seminars in oncology.

[9]  ChaoHua Wen,et al.  Design and production of color calibration targets for digital input devices , 2000, SPIE Photonics Taiwan.

[10]  L. Goldstein,et al.  Automated quantitative analysis of estrogen receptor expression in breast carcinoma does not differ from expert pathologist scoring: a tissue microarray study of 3,484 cases , 2008, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[11]  T. Hastie,et al.  New cutpoints to identify increased HER2 copy number: analysis of a large, population-based cohort with long-term follow-up , 2008, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[12]  H. Tsuda,et al.  Evaluation of interobserver agreement in scoring immunohistochemical results of HER‐2/neu (c‐erbB‐2) expression detected by HercepTest, Nichirei polyclonal antibody, CB11 and TAB250 in breast carcinoma , 2002, Pathology international.

[13]  R. Marcelpoil,et al.  Machine scoring of Her2/neu immunohistochemical stains. , 2002, Analytical and quantitative cytology and histology.

[14]  A. Gown,et al.  Specificity of HercepTest in determining HER-2/neu status of breast cancers using the United States Food and Drug Administration-approved scoring system. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[15]  Kyle Porter,et al.  Semi‐automated imaging system to quantitate Her‐2/neu membrane receptor immunoreactivity in human breast cancer , 2007, Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology.

[16]  E. Kay,et al.  C-erbB-2 immunostaining: problems with interpretation. , 1994, Journal of clinical pathology.

[17]  H. Tsuda,et al.  Detection of HER‐2/neu (c‐erb B‐2) DNA amplification in primary breast carcinoma , 2001, Cancer.

[18]  N. Diaz.  Laboratory testing for HER2/neu in breast carcinoma: an evolving strategy to predict response to targeted therapy. , 2001, Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center.

[19]  K. Bloom,et al.  Enhanced accuracy and reliability of HER-2/neu immunohistochemical scoring using digital microscopy. , 2004, American journal of clinical pathology.

[20]  R. Walker,et al.  Quantification of immunohistochemistry—issues concerning methods, utility and semiquantitative assessment I , 2006, Histopathology.

[21]  Anthony Rhodes,et al.  American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. , 2006, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[22]  H. Tsuda,et al.  Interlaboratory Comparison in HercepTest Assessment of HER2 Protein Status in Invasive Breast Carcinoma Fixed With Various Formalin-based Fixatives , 2003, Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM.

[23]  Anne Vincent-Salomon,et al.  High inter-observer agreement in immunohistochemical evaluation of HER-2/neu expression in breast cancer: a multicentre GEFPICS study. , 2006, European journal of cancer.

[24]  H. Tsuda,et al.  Concordance in judgments among c‐erbB‐2 (HER2/neu) overexpression detected by two immunohistochemical tests and gene amplification detected by Southern blot hybridization in breast carcinoma , 2001, Pathology international.

[25]  F. Schmitt,et al.  Selecting Antibodies to Detect HER2 Overexpression by Immunohistochemistry in Invasive Mammary Carcinomas , 2006, Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM.

[26]  T. Stephenson,et al.  HER2 amplification status in breast cancer: a comparison between immunohistochemical staining and fluorescence in situ hybridisation using manual and automated quantitative image analysis scoring techniques , 2005, Journal of Clinical Pathology.

[27]  J. Forteza,et al.  HER-2 status determination in breast carcinomas. A practical approach. , 2006, Histology and histopathology.

[28]  A. Leong,et al.  Refinement of Immunohistologic Parameters for Her2/neu Scoring Validation by FISH and CISH , 2006, Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM.

[29]  Ash A. Alizadeh,et al.  Software tools for high-throughput analysis and archiving of immunohistochemistry staining data obtained with tissue microarrays. , 2002, The American journal of pathology.

[30]  Karl R Gegenfurtner,et al.  Time course of chromatic adaptation for color appearance and discrimination , 2000, Vision Research.

[31]  R M Levenson,et al.  Quantification of immunohistochemistry—issues concerning methods, utility and semiquantitative assessment II , 2006, Histopathology.

[32]  K. Bloom,et al.  The Her-2/neu gene and protein in breast cancer 2003: biomarker and target of therapy. , 2003, The oncologist.

[33]  S. Ménard,et al.  Interobserver Reproducibility of Immunohistochemical Her-2/Neu Evaluation in Human Breast Cancer: The Real-World Experience , 2004, The International journal of biological markers.

[34]  T. Grogan,et al.  Discrepancies in clinical laboratory testing of eligibility for trastuzumab therapy: apparent immunohistochemical false-positives do not get the message. , 2001, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[35]  J. Baak,et al.  Comparing subjective and digital image analysis HER2/neu expression scores with conventional and modified FISH scores in breast cancer , 2007, Journal of Clinical Pathology.

[36]  Hung Chiang,et al.  Interobserver reproducibility of Her-2/neu protein overexpression in invasive breast carcinoma using the DAKO HercepTest. , 2002, American journal of clinical pathology.

[37]  A. Sapino,et al.  Which breast carcinomas need HER‐2/neu gene study after immunohistochemical analysis? Results of combined use of antibodies against different c‐erbB2 protein domains , 2003, Histopathology.

[38]  Alex Byrne,et al.  Color realism and color science , 2003, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[39]  E. Mallon,et al.  IHC for Her2 with CBE356 antibody is a more accurate predictor of Her2 gene amplification by FISH than HercepTest™ in breast carcinoma , 2005, Journal of Clinical Pathology.

[40]  R. Tubbs,et al.  HER2 testing: a review of detection methodologies and their clinical performance , 2007, Expert review of molecular diagnostics.

[41]  Z. Nemes,et al.  Comparison of immunohistochemical and fluorescence in situ hybridization assessment of HER-2 status in routine practice. , 2006, American journal of clinical pathology.

[42]  A. Thor.  HER2--a discussion of testing approaches in the USA. , 2001, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[43]  Siapec-Iap.  Interobserver Reproducibility of Immunohistochemical Her-2/Neu Assessment in Human Breast Cancer: An Update from INQAT round III , 2005, The International journal of biological markers.

[44]  Peter A Kaufman,et al.  Concordance between local and central laboratory HER2 testing in the breast intergroup trial N9831. , 2002, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[45]  P. Thomas,et al.  Comparison of immunohistochemistry by automated cellular imaging system (ACIS) versus fluorescence in‐situ hybridization in the evaluation of HER‐2/neu expression in primary breast carcinoma , 2006, Histopathology.

[46]  H. Tsuda,et al.  Quantitative immunohistochemical evaluation of HER2/neu expression with HercepTestTM in breast carcinoma by image analysis , 2001, Pathology international.

[47]  D. Huntsman,et al.  Tissue microarray analysis of neuroendocrine differentiation and its prognostic significance in breast cancer. , 2003, Human pathology.

[48]  A. Gown.  Current issues in ER and HER2 testing by IHC in breast cancer , 2008, Modern Pathology.

[49]  Monilola A. Olayioye,et al.  Update on HER-2 as a target for cancer therapy: Intracellular signaling pathways of ErbB2/HER-2 and family members , 2001, Breast Cancer Research.

[50]  B. Deyarmin,et al.  Amplification of HER2 is a marker for global genomic instability , 2008, BMC Cancer.

[51]  A. Vincent-Salomon,et al.  Calibration of immunohistochemistry for assessment of HER2 in breast cancer: results of the French Multicentre GEFPICS * Study , 2003, Histopathology.

[52]  J. Metcalf,et al.  A testing algorithm for determination of HER2 status in patients with breast cancer. , 2002, Annals of clinical and laboratory science.

[53]  L. Rodríguez Moguel,et al.  [Reproducibility of Her-2/neu overexpression with HERCEP test in invasive ductal breast cancer]. , 2002, Ginecología y Obstetricia de México.

[54]  John J Spinelli,et al.  HER-2/neu in Breast Cancer: Interobserver Variability and Performance of Immunohistochemistry with 4 Antibodies Compared with Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization , 2001, Modern Pathology.

[55]  Frédérique Penault-Llorca,et al.  [Immunochemistry evaluation of HER2 status in infiltration breast cancer: technical protocol and interpretation guidelines]. , 2002, Annales de pathologie.

[56]  M. Kenward,et al.  An Introduction to the Bootstrap , 2007 .

[57]  T. Grogan,et al.  Analytical Validation and Interobserver Reproducibility of EnzMet GenePro: A Second-Generation Bright-Field Metallography Assay for Concomitant Detection of HER2 Gene Status and Protein Expression in Invasive Carcinoma of the Breast , 2005, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[58]  J. Beneke,et al.  HER2 assessment by immunohistochemical analysis and fluorescence in situ hybridization: comparison of HercepTest and PathVysion commercial assays. , 2002, American journal of clinical pathology.

[59]  Anthony Rhodes,et al.  Evaluation of HER-2/neu immunohistochemical assay sensitivity and scoring on formalin-fixed and paraffin-processed cell lines and breast tumors: a comparative study involving results from laboratories in 21 countries. , 2002, American journal of clinical pathology.