4.3 Article

Assessing HER2 amplification by IHC, FISH, and real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis (real-time PCR) following LCM in formalin-fixed paraffin embedded tissue from 40 women with ovarian cancer

Journal

APMIS
Volume 120, Issue 12, Pages 1000-1007

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0463.2012.02929.x

Keywords

HER2; laser capture microdissection; fluorescence in situ hybridization; ovarian cancer; diagnosis

Funding

  1. Hillerod Hospital Research Foundation
  2. Health Scientific Research Foundation, Region Zealand

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We compare HER2 receptor amplification analysis by immunohistochemistry (IHC), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and real-time polymerase chain reaction (real-time PCR) DNA copy-number assay following laser capture microdissection (LCM) in formalin-fixed paraffin embedded tissue from 40 women with verified ovarian cancer. We speculate that LCM should result in a more accurate assessment of HER2 amplification in our real-time PCR assay compared with IHC and FISH. HER2 overexpression measured by IHC, FISH, or real-time PCR was found in 5.0%, 5.0%, and 22.5%, respectively. HER2 negative results measured by IHC, FISH, or real-time PCR were found in 95%, 92.5%, and 60.0%, respectively. Analysis failed for IHC, FISH, or real-time PCR in 0%, 2.5%, or 17.5% of cases. Concordance between IHC and FISH, IHC and real-time PCR, or FISH and real-time PCR were 89.7%, 72.7%, or 78.1%, respectively. Only few ovarian cancer patients were HER2 overexpressed measured by IHC or FISH and thus could be eligible for antibody-based therapy with trastuzumab (Herceptin). Interestingly, we find an increased number of HER2 positive patients by real-time PCR analysis on microdissected cancer cells, suggesting a number of HER2 positive patients not detected by current methods. Thus, the concept of quantitative measurement of HER2 on microdissected cancer cells should be explored further.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available