Standardization of Estrogen Receptor Measurement in Breast Cancer Suggests False-Negative Results Are a Function of Threshold Intensity Rather Than Percentage of Positive Cells
- 1 August 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Vol. 29 (22), 2978-2984
- https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2010.32.9706
Abstract
Purpose: Recent misclassification (false negative) incidents have raised awareness concerning limitations of immunohistochemistry (IHC) in assessment of estrogen receptor (ER) in breast cancer. Here we define a new method for standardization of ER measurement and then examine both change in percentage and threshold of intensity (immunoreactivity) to assess sources for test discordance. Methods: An assay was developed to quantify ER by using a control tissue microarray (TMA) and a series of cell lines in which ER immunoreactivity was analyzed by quantitative immunoblotting in parallel with the automated quantitative analysis (AQUA) method of quantitative immunofluorescence (QIF). The assay was used to assess the ER protein expression threshold in two independent retrospective cohorts from Yale and was compared with traditional methods. Results: Two methods of analysis showed that change in percentage of positive cells from 10% to 1% did not significantly affect the overall number of ER-positive patients. The standardized assay for ER on two Yale TMA cohorts showed that 67.9% and 82.5% of the patients were above the 2-pg/μg immunoreactivity threshold. We found 9.1% and 19.7% of the patients to be QIF-positive/IHC-negative, and 4.0% and 0.4% to be QIF-negative/IHC-positive for a total of 13.1% and 20.1% discrepant cases when compared with pathologists' judgment of threshold. Assessment of survival for both cohorts showed that patients who were QIF-positive/pathologist-negative had outcomes similar to those of patients who had positive results for both assays. Conclusion: Assessment of intensity threshold by using a quantitative, standardized assay on two independent cohorts suggests discordance in the 10% to 20% range with current IHC methods, in which patients with discrepant results have prognostic outcomes similar to ER-positive patients with concordant results.This publication has 19 references indexed in Scilit:
- American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guideline Recommendations for Immunohistochemical Testing of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptors in Breast CancerJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2010
- Multiplexed Assessment of the Southwest Oncology Group-Directed Intergroup Breast Cancer Trial S9313 by AQUA Shows that Both High and Low Levels of HER2 Are Associated with Poor OutcomeThe American Journal of Pathology, 2010
- Breast Cancer Receptor Status: Do Results from a Centralized Pathology Laboratory Agree with SEER Registry Reports?Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 2009
- Estrogen receptor expression in breast cancer: we cannot ignore the shades of gray.American Journal of Clinical Pathology, 2008
- Commentary: Hormone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: A Distress Signal from CanadaThe Oncologist, 2008
- Nuclear to non-nuclear Pmel17/gp100 expression (HMB45 staining) as a discriminator between benign and malignant melanocytic lesionsLaboratory Investigation, 2008
- Quantitative Justification of the Change From 10% to 30% for Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Scoring in the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guidelines: Tumor Heterogeneity in Breast Cancer and Its Implications for Tissue Microarray–Based Assessment of OutcomeJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2007
- American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 Update of Recommendations for the Use of Tumor Markers in Breast CancerJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2007
- Quantitative Measurement of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Is a Negative Predictive Factor for Tamoxifen Response in Hormone Receptor–Positive Premenopausal Breast CancerJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2007
- Increases in estrogen receptor‐α concentration in breast cancer cells promote serine 118/104/106‐independent AF‐1 transactivation and growth in the absence of estrogenThe FASEB Journal, 2003