Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30520947›Full record

ArticleJAMA oncology2019

Assessment of ERBB2/HER2 Status in HER2-Equivocal Breast Cancers by FISH and 2013/2014 ASCO-CAP Guidelines.

Michael F Press, Jose A Seoane, Christina Curtis, Emmanuel Quinaux, Roberta Guzman, Guido Sauter, Wolfgang Eiermann, John R Mackey, Nicholas Robert, Tadeusz Pienkowski and 7 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Integrated genomic characterization of ERBB2/HER2 alterations in invasive breast carcinoma: a focus on unusual FISH groups.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2020
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 13 institutions in 8 countries.

Michael F PressNorris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Jose A SeoaneDepartments of Medicine & Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Christina CurtisDepartments of Medicine & Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Emmanuel QuinauxInternational Drug Development Institute, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Roberta GuzmanNorris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Guido SauterUniversity of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Wolfgang EiermannFrauenklinik vom Roten Kreuz, Munich, Germany.
John R MackeyDepartment of Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Nicholas RobertVirginia Cancer Specialists/US Oncology Research Network, Fairfax, Virginia.
Tadeusz PienkowskiPostgraduate Medical Education Center, Warsaw, Poland.
John CrownIrish Cooperative Oncology Research Group, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Miguel MartinInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria Gregorio Marañón, CIBERONC, GEICAM, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain.
Vicente ValeroThe University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Valerie BeeCancer International Research Group/Translational Research in Oncology, Paris, France.
Yanling MaNorris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Ivonne VillalobosNorris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Dennis J SlamonDepartment of Medicine, Geffen School of Medicine at University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles.
University of Southern California · USStanford University · USCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer · ESInternational Drug Development Institute (Belgium) · BEKrankenhaus vom Roten Kreuz · DEPostgraduate School of Molecular Medicine · PLSt. Vincent's University Hospital · IEThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USThe US Oncology Network · USTranslational Research in Oncology · FRUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversity of Alberta · CAUniversity of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
Integrated genomic analysis and multi-scale modeling of therapeutic resistanceR01CA182514 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI CURTIS, CHRISTINA N · 2014 to 2018
$2.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS R01 CA182514
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The 2013/2014 American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists (ASCO-CAP) guidelines for HER2 testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) designated an "equivocal" category (average HER2 copies per tumor cell ≥4-6 with HER2/CEP17 ratio <2.0) to be resolved as negative or positive by assessments with alternative control probes. Approximately 4% to 12% of all invasive breast cancers are characterized as HER2-equivocal based on FISH. Objective: To evaluate the following hypotheses: (1) genetic loci used as alternative controls are heterozygously deleted in a substantial proportion of breast cancers; (2) use of these loci for assessment of HER2 by FISH leads to false-positive assessments; and (3) these HER2 false-positive breast cancer patients have outcomes that do not differ from clinical outcomes for patients with HER2-negative breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: We retrospectively assessed the use of chromosome 17 p-arm and q-arm alternative control genomic sites (TP53, D17S122, SMS, RARA, TOP2A), as recommended by the 2013/2014 ASCO-CAP guidelines for HER2 testing, in patients whose data were available through Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium (METABRIC) and whose tissues were available through the Breast Cancer International Research Group clinical trials. We used data from an international cohort database of invasive breast cancers (1980 participants) and international clinical trial of adjuvant chemotherapy in invasive, node-positive breast cancer patients. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary objectives were to (1) assess frequency of heterozygous deletions in chromosome 17 genomic sites used as FISH internal controls for evaluation of HER2 status among HER2-equivocal cancers; (2) characterize impact of using deleted sites for determination of HER2-to-internal-control-gene ratios; (3) assess HER2 protein expression in each subgroup; and (4) compare clinical outcomes for each subgroup. Results: Of the 1980 patients in METABRIC,1915 patients were fully evaluated. In addition, 100 HER2-equivocal breast cancers by FISH and 100 comparator FISH-negative breast cancers from the BCIRG-005 trial were analyzed. Heterozygous deletions, particularly in specific p-arm sites, were common in both HER2-amplified and HER2-not-amplified breast cancers. Use of alternative control probes from these regions to assess HER2 by FISH in HER2-equivocal as well as HER2-not-amplified breast cancers resulted in high rates of false-positive ratios (HER2-to-alternative control ratio ≥2.0) owing to heterozygous deletions of control p-arm genomic sites used in ratio denominators. Misclassification of HER2 status was observed not only in breast cancers with ASCO-CAP equivocal status but also in breast cancers with an average of fewer than 4.0 HER2 copies per tumor cell when using alternative control probes. Conclusions and Relevance: The indiscriminate use of alternative control probes to calculate HER2 FISH ratios in HER2-equivocal breast cancers may lead to false-positive interpretations of HER2 status resulting from unrecognized heterozygous deletions in 1 or more of these alternative control genomic sites and incorrect HER2 ratio determinations.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsChromosome DeletionChromosomes, Human, Pair 17Databases, GeneticDNA ProbesErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleGenetic LociGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHeterozygoteHumansImmunohistochemistryIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescencePhenotypeBiomarkers, TumorDNA ProbesERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine Kinases

Identifiers

PMID30520947
PMCPMC6439848
OpenAlexW2904240523

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.