This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (65)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letters  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Oncology  • Breast Cancer  • Women's Health, Other  • Prognosis/ Outcomes  • Genetic Counseling/ Testing/ Therapy  • Alert me on articles by topic

Hadi Yaziji, MD; Lynn C. Goldstein, MD; Todd S. Barry, MD, PhD; Robert Werling, MD; Harry Hwang, MD; Georgiana K. Ellis, MD; Julie R. Gralow, MD; Robert B. Livingston, MD; Allen M. Gown, MD

JAMA. 2004;291:1972-1977.

Context  Testing for HER-2 oncogene in breast cancer has increased because of its role as a prognostic and predictive factor. Some advocate gene testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) vs protein testing by immunohistochemistry as the method which most accurately evaluates and predicts response to the anti–HER-2 antibody, trastuzumab. However, critical examination of FISH on a screening basis has yet to be performed.

Objectives  To determine the correlation between FISH and immunohistochemistry results by determining HER-2/neu gene status on tumor sections with indeterminate immunohistochemistry results (2+ score), confirm gene amplification on tumor sections with positive results (3+ score), and verify gene status on tumor sections with negative results (0 or 1+ score).

Design, Setting, and Patients  A quality control and quality assurance program for HER-2 testing by FISH, which used tumor specimens from 2963 patients (median age, 56 years) with breast cancer received from 135 hospitals and cancer centers in 29 states, was performed at a reference laboratory from January 1, 1999, to May 15, 2003. Every specimen evaluated by FISH was parallel tested with immunohistochemistry tests.

Main Outcome Measures  With FISH as the presumed standard testing method, the positive and negative predictive values and sensitivity and specificity of immunohistochemistry were calculated.

Results  A total of 3260 clinical HER-2 tests by FISH were performed on 2963 serially referred breast cancer specimens. Of these, 2933 tests were successful and 2913 breast cancer specimens had both FISH and immunohistochemistry results available. With FISH as the standard testing method, the positive predictive value of positive immunohistochemistry score (3+) was 91.6%, and the negative predictive value of negative immunohistochemistry score (0 or 1+) was 97.2%. The sensitivity of immunohistochemistry tests, including tumor sections with scores of 2+ or 3+, was 92.6% and the specificity of immunohistochemistry tests with scores of 3+ was 98.8%. The FISH test had a significantly higher failure rate (5% vs 0.08%) and reagent cost ($140 vs $10), and longer testing (36 hours vs 4 hours) and interpretation times (7 minutes vs 45 seconds) vs immunohistochemistry tests.

Conclusions  A testing algorithm for HER-2 determination is most efficient by using immunohistochemistry as the method of choice, with FISH performed for cancers with indeterminate results (2+ score). Successful quality control and quality assurance programs are a prerequisite for such approaches.

Author Affiliations: PhenoPath Laboratories (Drs Yaziji, Goldstein, Barry, Werling, Hwang, and Gown); and Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington School of Medicine (Drs Ellis, Gralow, and Livingston), Seattle, Wash.

RELATED LETTERS

HER-2 and Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization to Evaluate Breast Cancer
Tawee Tanvetyanon
JAMA. 2004;292(3):328.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

HER-2 and Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization to Evaluate Breast Cancer—Reply
Hadi Yaziji
JAMA. 2004;292(3):328-329.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

HER-2 Testing in Breast Cancer
Raymond R. Tubbs and David G. Hicks
JAMA. 2004;292(15):1817-1818.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

High-Quality HER-2 Testing: Setting a Standard for Oncologic Biomarker Assessment
Elizabeth L. Wiley and Leslie K. Diaz
JAMA. 2004;291(16):2019-2020.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Body Size and Risk of Luminal, HER2-Overexpressing, and Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in Postmenopausal Women
Phipps et al.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2008;17:2078-2086.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

HER2 testing in the UK: further update to recommendations
Walker et al.
J. Clin. Pathol. 2008;61:818-824.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Immunohistochemical markers as predictive tools for breast cancer
Walker
J. Clin. Pathol. 2008;61:689-696.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Estrogen Receptor, Progesterone Receptor, HER-2, and Response to Postmastectomy Radiotherapy in High-Risk Breast Cancer: The Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group
Kyndi et al.
JCO 2008;26:1419-1426.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Basal-Like Breast Cancer Defined by Five Biomarkers Has Superior Prognostic Value than Triple-Negative Phenotype
Cheang et al.
Clin. Cancer Res. 2008;14:1368-1376.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The effect of chromosome 17 polysomy on HER-2/neu status in breast cancer
Hyun et al.
J. Clin. Pathol. 2008;61:317-321.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Frequency and reliability of oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and HER2 in breast carcinoma determined by immunohistochemistry in Australasia: results of the RCPA Quality Assurance Program
Francis et al.
J. Clin. Pathol. 2007;60:1277-1283.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

HER2 status in breast cancer--an example of pharmacogenetic testing
Kroese et al.
JRSM 2007;100:326-329.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Amplification of the HER2 gene in breast cancers testing 2+ weak positive by HercepTest immunohistochemistry: false-positive or false-negative immunohistochemistry?
Barrett et al.
J. Clin. Pathol. 2007;60:690-693.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Testing for HER2-positive breast cancer: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis
Dendukuri et al.
CMAJ 2007;176:1429-1434.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Analysis of HER2 Gene Amplification Using an Automated Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization Signal Enumeration System
Stevens et al.
J. Mol. Diagn. 2007;9:144-150.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guideline Recommendations for Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Testing in Breast Cancer
Wolff et al.
JCO 2007;25:118-145.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Newer developments in immunohistology.
Leong and Leong
J. Clin. Pathol. 2006;59:1117-1126.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Predicting Tissue HER2 Status Using Serum HER2 Levels in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer
Kong et al.
Clin. Chem. 2006;52:1510-1515.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Hormone receptors do not predict the HER2/neu status in all age groups of women with an operable breast cancer
Huang et al.
Ann Oncol 2005;16:1755-1761.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Diagnostic Evaluation of HER-2 as a Molecular Target: An Assessment of Accuracy and Reproducibility of Laboratory Testing in Large, Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trials
Press et al.
Clin. Cancer Res. 2005;11:6598-6607.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Comparison of liquid based cytology and histology for the evaluation of HER-2 status using immunostaining and CISH in breast carcinoma
Sartelet et al.
J. Clin. Pathol. 2005;58:864-871.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Evaluation of the Quantitative Analytical Methods Real-Time PCR for HER-2 Gene Quantification and ELISA of Serum HER-2 Protein and Comparison with Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization and Immunohistochemistry for Determining HER-2 Status in Breast Cancer Patients
Tse et al.
Clin. Chem. 2005;51:1093-1101.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Polysomy 17 in HER-2/neu Status Elaboration in Breast Cancer: Effect on Daily Practice
Ma et al.
Clin. Cancer Res. 2005;11:4393-4399.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Association between tumour characteristics and HER-2/neu by immunohistochemistry in 1362 women with primary operable breast cancer
Huang et al.
J. Clin. Pathol. 2005;58:611-616.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

HER-2 Testing in Breast Cancer
Tubbs and Hicks
JAMA 2004;292:1817-1818.
FULL TEXT  

HER-2 and Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization to Evaluate Breast Cancer
Tanvetyanon
JAMA 2004;292:328-328.
FULL TEXT  

High-Quality HER-2 Testing: Setting a Standard for Oncologic Biomarker Assessment
Wiley and Diaz
JAMA 2004;291:2019-2020.
FULL TEXT