Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2015

01-07-2015 | Clinical trial

Optimizing HER2 assessment in breast cancer: application of automated image analysis

Authors: Henrik Holten-Rossing, Maj-Lis Møller Talman, Martin Kristensson, Ben Vainer

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 2/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

In breast cancer, analysis of HER2 expression is pivotal for treatment decision. This study aimed at comparing digital, automated image analysis with manual reading using the HER2-CONNECT algorithm (Visiopharm) in order to minimize the number of equivocal 2+ scores and the need for reflex fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis. Consecutive samples from 462 patients were included. Tissue micro arrays (TMAs) were routinely manufactured including two 2 mm cores from each patient, and each core was assessed in order to ensure the presence of invasive carcinoma. Immunohistochemical staining (IHC) was performed with Roche/Ventana’s HER2 ready-to-use kit. TMAs were scanned in a Zeiss Axio Z1 scanner, and one batch analysis of the HER2-CONNECT algorithm including all core samples was run using Visiopharm’s cloud-based software. The automated reading was compared to conventional manual assessment of HER2 protein expression, together with FISH analysis of HER2 gene amplification for borderline (2+) protein expression samples. Compared to FISH analysis, manual assessment of the HER2 protein expression demonstrated a sensitivity of 85.8 % and a specificity of 86.0 % with 14.0 % equivocal samples. With HER2-CONNECT, sensitivity increased to 100 % and specificity to 95.5 % with less than 4.5 % equivocal. Total agreement when comparing HER2-CONNECT with manual IHC assessment supplemented by FISH for borderline (2+) cases was 93.6 %. Application of automated image analysis for HER2 protein expression instead of manual assessment decreases the need for supplementary FISH testing by 68 %. In the routine diagnostic setting, this would have significant impact on cost reduction and turn-around time.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG, Dowsett M, McShane LM, Allison KH, Allred DC, Bartlett JM, Bilous M, Fitzgibbons P et al (2013) Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: american Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 31:3997–4013PubMedCrossRef Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG, Dowsett M, McShane LM, Allison KH, Allred DC, Bartlett JM, Bilous M, Fitzgibbons P et al (2013) Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: american Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 31:3997–4013PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG, Levin WJ, Ullrich A (1987) McGuire WL (1987) Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene. Science 235:177–182PubMedCrossRef Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG, Levin WJ, Ullrich A (1987) McGuire WL (1987) Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene. Science 235:177–182PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Rossing HH, Talman ML, Laenkholm AV, Wielenga VT (2012) Implementation of TMA and digitalization in routine diagnostics of breast pathology. APMIS 120:341–347PubMedCrossRef Rossing HH, Talman ML, Laenkholm AV, Wielenga VT (2012) Implementation of TMA and digitalization in routine diagnostics of breast pathology. APMIS 120:341–347PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, Hagerty KL, Allred DC, Cote RJ, Dowsett M, Fitzgibbons PL, Hanna WM, Langer A et al (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 131:18–43PubMed Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, Hagerty KL, Allred DC, Cote RJ, Dowsett M, Fitzgibbons PL, Hanna WM, Langer A et al (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 131:18–43PubMed
5.
go back to reference Winston JS, Ramanaryanan J (2004) Levine E (2004) HER-2/neu evaluation in breast cancer are we there yet? Am J Clin Pathol 121(Suppl):S33–S49PubMed Winston JS, Ramanaryanan J (2004) Levine E (2004) HER-2/neu evaluation in breast cancer are we there yet? Am J Clin Pathol 121(Suppl):S33–S49PubMed
6.
go back to reference Torlakovic EE, Nielsen S, Francis G, Garratt J, Gilks B, Goldsmith JD, Hornick JL, Hyjek E, Ibrahim M, Miller K et al (2015) Standardization of positive controls in diagnostic immunohistochemistry: recommendations from the International Ad Hoc Expert Committee. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 23:1–18PubMedCrossRef Torlakovic EE, Nielsen S, Francis G, Garratt J, Gilks B, Goldsmith JD, Hornick JL, Hyjek E, Ibrahim M, Miller K et al (2015) Standardization of positive controls in diagnostic immunohistochemistry: recommendations from the International Ad Hoc Expert Committee. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 23:1–18PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Dobson L, Conway C, Hanley A, Johnson A, Costello S, O’Grady A, Connolly Y, Magee H, O’Shea D, Jeffers M, Kay E (2010) Image analysis as an adjunct to manual HER-2 immunohistochemical review: a diagnostic tool to standardize interpretation. Histopathology 57:27–38PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Dobson L, Conway C, Hanley A, Johnson A, Costello S, O’Grady A, Connolly Y, Magee H, O’Shea D, Jeffers M, Kay E (2010) Image analysis as an adjunct to manual HER-2 immunohistochemical review: a diagnostic tool to standardize interpretation. Histopathology 57:27–38PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Brugmann A, Eld M, Lelkaitis G, Nielsen S, Grunkin M, Hansen JD, Foged NT, Vyberg M (2012) Digital image analysis of membrane connectivity is a robust measure of HER2 immunostains. Breast Cancer Res Treat 132:41–49PubMedCrossRef Brugmann A, Eld M, Lelkaitis G, Nielsen S, Grunkin M, Hansen JD, Foged NT, Vyberg M (2012) Digital image analysis of membrane connectivity is a robust measure of HER2 immunostains. Breast Cancer Res Treat 132:41–49PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Di Palma S, Collins N, Faulkes C, Ping B, Ferns G, Haagsma B, Layer G, Kissin MW, Cook MG (2007) Chromogenic in situ hybridisation (CISH) should be an accepted method in the routine diagnostic evaluation of HER2 status in breast cancer. J Clin Pathol 60:1067–1068PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Di Palma S, Collins N, Faulkes C, Ping B, Ferns G, Haagsma B, Layer G, Kissin MW, Cook MG (2007) Chromogenic in situ hybridisation (CISH) should be an accepted method in the routine diagnostic evaluation of HER2 status in breast cancer. J Clin Pathol 60:1067–1068PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Ellis CM, Dyson MJ, Stephenson TJ, Maltby EL (2005) 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. J Clin Pathol 58:710–714PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Ellis CM, Dyson MJ, Stephenson TJ, Maltby EL (2005) 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. J Clin Pathol 58:710–714PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Laurinaviciene A, Dasevicius D, Ostapenko V, Jarmalaite S, Lazutka J, Laurinavicius A (2011) Membrane connectivity estimated by digital image analysis of HER2 immunohistochemistry is concordant with visual scoring and fluorescence in situ hybridization results: algorithm evaluation on breast cancer tissue microarrays. Diagn Pathol 6:87PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Laurinaviciene A, Dasevicius D, Ostapenko V, Jarmalaite S, Lazutka J, Laurinavicius A (2011) Membrane connectivity estimated by digital image analysis of HER2 immunohistochemistry is concordant with visual scoring and fluorescence in situ hybridization results: algorithm evaluation on breast cancer tissue microarrays. Diagn Pathol 6:87PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Tse CH, Hwang HC, Goldstein LC, Kandalaft PL, Wiley JC, Kussick SJ, Gown AM (2011) Determining true HER2 gene status in breast cancers with polysomy by using alternative chromosome 17 reference genes: implications for anti-HER2 targeted therapy. J Clin Oncol 29:4168–4174PubMedCrossRef Tse CH, Hwang HC, Goldstein LC, Kandalaft PL, Wiley JC, Kussick SJ, Gown AM (2011) Determining true HER2 gene status in breast cancers with polysomy by using alternative chromosome 17 reference genes: implications for anti-HER2 targeted therapy. J Clin Oncol 29:4168–4174PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Lacroix-Triki M, Mathoulin-Pelissier S, Ghnassia JP, Macgrogan G, Vincent-Salomon A, Brouste V, Mathieu MC, Roger P, Bibeau F, Jacquemier J et al (2006) High inter-observer agreement in immunohistochemical evaluation of HER-2/neu expression in breast cancer: a multicentre GEFPICS study. Eur J Cancer 42:2946–2953PubMedCrossRef Lacroix-Triki M, Mathoulin-Pelissier S, Ghnassia JP, Macgrogan G, Vincent-Salomon A, Brouste V, Mathieu MC, Roger P, Bibeau F, Jacquemier J et al (2006) High inter-observer agreement in immunohistochemical evaluation of HER-2/neu expression in breast cancer: a multicentre GEFPICS study. Eur J Cancer 42:2946–2953PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Press MF, Sauter G, Bernstein L, Villalobos IE, Mirlacher M, Zhou JY, Wardeh R, Li YT, Guzman R, Ma Y et al (2005) Diagnostic evaluation of HER-2 as a molecular target: an assessment of accuracy and reproducibility of laboratory testing in large, prospective, randomized clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res 11:6598–6607PubMedCrossRef Press MF, Sauter G, Bernstein L, Villalobos IE, Mirlacher M, Zhou JY, Wardeh R, Li YT, Guzman R, Ma Y et al (2005) Diagnostic evaluation of HER-2 as a molecular target: an assessment of accuracy and reproducibility of laboratory testing in large, prospective, randomized clinical trials. Clin Cancer Res 11:6598–6607PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Tadrous PJ (2010) On the concept of objectivity in digital image analysis in pathology. Pathology 42:207–211PubMedCrossRef Tadrous PJ (2010) On the concept of objectivity in digital image analysis in pathology. Pathology 42:207–211PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Keay T, Conway CM, O’Flaherty N, Hewitt SM, Shea K, Gavrielides MA (2013) Reproducibility in the automated quantitative assessment of HER2/neu for breast cancer. J Pathol Inform 4:19PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Keay T, Conway CM, O’Flaherty N, Hewitt SM, Shea K, Gavrielides MA (2013) Reproducibility in the automated quantitative assessment of HER2/neu for breast cancer. J Pathol Inform 4:19PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Iorfida M, Dellapasqua S, Bagnardi V, Cardillo A, Rotmensz N, Mastropasqua MG, Bottiglieri L, Goldhirsch A, Viale G, Colleoni M (2012) HER2-negative (1+) breast cancer with unfavorable prognostic features: to FISH or not to FISH? Ann Oncol 23:1371–1372PubMedCrossRef Iorfida M, Dellapasqua S, Bagnardi V, Cardillo A, Rotmensz N, Mastropasqua MG, Bottiglieri L, Goldhirsch A, Viale G, Colleoni M (2012) HER2-negative (1+) breast cancer with unfavorable prognostic features: to FISH or not to FISH? Ann Oncol 23:1371–1372PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Optimizing HER2 assessment in breast cancer: application of automated image analysis
Authors
Henrik Holten-Rossing
Maj-Lis Møller Talman
Martin Kristensson
Ben Vainer
Publication date
01-07-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 2/2015
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3475-3

Other articles of this Issue 2/2015

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2015 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine