1 / 25

Guideline Recommendations for HER2 Testing in Breast Cancer ASCO/College of American Pathologists Practice Guideline Rec

Guideline Recommendations for HER2 Testing in Breast Cancer ASCO/College of American Pathologists Practice Guideline Recommendations. Introduction.

quynh
Download Presentation

Guideline Recommendations for HER2 Testing in Breast Cancer ASCO/College of American Pathologists Practice Guideline Rec

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Guideline Recommendations for HER2 Testing in Breast Cancer ASCO/College of American Pathologists Practice Guideline Recommendations

  2. Introduction • ASCO and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) convened an Expert Panel to develop a guideline to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing in invasive breast cancer and its utility as a predictive marker. • The guideline was reviewed by experts in clinical medicine and research and approved by the Board of Directors at both ASCO and CAP. • The ASCO/CAP Expert Panel included medical, academic and community experts as well as ex-officio representation from leading federal agencies including international representation from medical organizations.

  3. Introduction (cont’d) • The ASCO/CAP Expert Panel composition: • Medical Oncology • Pathology • Epidemiology • Statistics • Health Services Research • Academic and Community Practitioners • Patient Representative • Federal Drug Administration (FDA) Representative* • Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Representative* • National Cancer Institute (NCI) Representative • National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry Representative * Denotes Ex-Officio Status

  4. Guideline Methodology: Systematic Review The Panel conducted a systematic review of the literature from January 1987 through February 2006: • MEDLINE • PreMEDLINE • Cochrane Collaboration Library • ASCO and CAP abstracts from 2000-2005 • Abstracts from the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (2003-2005)

  5. Guideline Methodology: Panel Members

  6. Guideline Methodology: Panel Members (cont’d)

  7. Background • HER2 is the common name for the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 gene ERBB2. Additional aliases include • NEU • NGL • TKR1 • c-erb B2 • HER-2/neu Ligand binding domain Transmembrane Tyrosine kinase domain HER1 HER2 HER3 HER4 Herbst. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;59(suppl):21; Roskoski. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2004;319:1; Rowinsky. Annu Rev Med. 2004;55:433.

  8. Background (cont’d) • HER2 amplification is the primary mechanism for overexpression • HER2 is amplified in 18-20% of breast cancers • HER2 overexpression is associated with certain clinical outcomes: • Higher risk of recurrence and mortality • Relative resistance to endocrine therapy • Apparent lesser benefit from certain chemotherapeutic regimens (e.g., non-anthracycline, non-taxane-containing agents)

  9. Background (cont’d) • Agents that target the HER2 pathway have been developed for use in the metastatic and adjuvant settings • Trastuzumab (anti-HER2 therapy) was FDA-approved in 1998 for treatment of metastatic disease • Adjuvant trastuzumab reduces the risk of recurrence and mortality by ½ and 1/3 , respectively, in patients with early stage, high-risk breast cancers that overexpress HER2 • Costs for one year of trastuzumab range from $70,000-$110,000 • Trastuzumab correlates with asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction (5-15% of patients) and symptomatic congestive heart failure (2-4% of patients)

  10. Background (cont’d) • Studies have shown that as many as 20% of HER2 assays performed in the field may be inaccurate • HER2 testing assays*: • Immunohistochemistry (IHC) • Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) • Bright field in situ hybridization • Note: Home brew assays refer to any assay developed internally by an individual lab that may or not have been validated. Various FDA-Approved Assays

  11. Background (cont’d) • The ASCO/CAP Expert Panel: • Recommends routine testing of HER2 in patients with invasive breast cancer • Addresses quality assurance measures and recommends specific methodology to improve HER2 testing accuracy

  12. Background (cont’d): Statistical Considerations • Accuracy • How close the measured values are to a “true” value • Implicit that a suitable “gold standard” exists • With binary measurements (e.g., positive vs. negative): • Sensitivity: % of positive test results when evaluating true positives • Specificity: % of negative test results when evaluating true negatives • Accuracy: % concordance between evaluated assay and gold standard • Combines sensitivity and specificity into a single measure of the percentage of cases (positive and negative) for which the assay result agrees with the true status For a fuller discussion of statistical considerations, see Appendix G at www.asco.org/guidelines/her2

  13. Guideline Questions • What is the optimal testing algorithm for the assessment of HER2 status? • What strategies can help ensure optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of established assays?

  14. Optimal Testing Algorithm for the Assessment of HER2 Status • HER2 testing results are categorized as positive, negative, or equivocal (new category) • Testing results definitions depend on laboratory documentation of the following items: • Proof of initial testing validation in which positive and negative HER2 categories are 95% concordant with alternative validated method or same validated method for HER2 (see Appendix F of the guideline on statistical requirements for assay validation, available at http://www.asco.org/guidelines/her2) • Ongoing internal QA procedures • Participation in ongoing external proficiency testing • Current accreditation by CAP or another valid accrediting agency

  15. Optimal Testing Algorithm (cont’d)

  16. Optimal Testing Algorithm (cont’d) • HER2 analysis must be preformed on the invasive component of breast cancer since HER2 overexpression and/or amplification is frequently increased in situ • Equivocal results require additional action: * Confirmatory IHC is recommended if FISH remains equivocal so that HER2 protein expression is known for the sample with true equivocal gene amplification status

  17. Optimal Testing Algorithm (cont’d): IHC Breast cancer specimen (invasive component) HER2 testing by validated IHC assay for HER2 protein expression Positive for HER2 protein expression IHC 3+ (defined as uniform intense membrane staining of >30% of invasive tumor cells) Negative for HER2 protein expression IHC 0 or 1+ Equivocal for HER2 protein expression IHC 2+ Test with validated assay for HER2 gene amplification Positive for HER2 gene amplification Negative for HER2 gene amplification Equivocal HER2 gene amplification (Patients with HER2/CEP17 ratio ≥2.0 were eligible for the adjuvant trastuzumab trials)

  18. Optimal Testing Algorithm (cont’d): FISH Breast cancer specimen (invasive component) HER2 testing by validated FISH assay for HER2 gene amplification Positive for HER2 gene amplification (FISH ratio >2.2 or HER2 gene copy >6.0) Equivocal for HER2 gene amplification (FISH ratio 1.8-2.2 or HER2 gene copy 4.0-6.0) Negative for HER2 gene amplification (FISH ratio <1.8 or HER2 gene copy <4.0) Count additional cells for FISH or retest, or test with HER2 IHC Equivocal HER2 gene amplification result (Patients with HER2/CEP17 ratio ≥2.0 were eligible for the adjuvant trastuzumab trials)

  19. Optimal Performance, Interpretation & Reporting • Laboratories that test for HER2 are required to participate in proficiency testing • HER2 status should be used for patient management only if the testing laboratory is CAP-accredited or has met accreditation requirements outlined in the ASCO/CAP guideline • Oncologists are encouraged to verify the laboratory accreditation status as well as confirm standardized reporting elements for IHC and/or FISH when reviewing HER2 test assessments

  20. Standardized Reporting Elements for IHC • Patient identification information • Physician identification • Date of service • Specimen identification (case and block number) • Specimen site and type • Specimen fixative type • Time to fixation (if available) • Duration of fixation (if available) • Antibody clone/vendor • Method used (specifics of test/vendor and if FDA-approved) • Image analysis method (if used) • Controls (high protein expression, low-level protein expression, negative protein expression, internal) • Adequacy of sample for evaluation • Results • Percentage of invasive tumor cells exhibiting complete membrane staining • Uniformity of staining: present/absent • Homogeneous, dark circumferential pattern: present/absent • Interpretation

  21. Standardized Reporting Elements for FISH • Patient identification information • Physician identification • Date of service • Specimen identification (case and block number) • Specimen site and type • Specimen fixative type • Time to fixation (if available) • Duration of fixation (if available) • Probe(s) identification • Method used (specifics of test/vendor and if FDA-approved) • Image analysis method (if used) • Controls (amplified, equivocal, and non-amplified, internal) • Adequacy of sample for evaluation (adequate number if invasive tumor cells present) • Results • Number of invasive tumor cells counted • Number of observers • Average number of HER2 signals/nucleus or tile • Average number of CEP 17 chromosome probes/nucleus or tile • Ratio of average HER2 signals/CEP 17 probe signals • Interpretation

  22. Optimal Performance, Interpretation & Reporting (cont’d) • The ASCO/CAP Expert Panel strongly recommends: • Validation of laboratory assay or modifications • Use of standardized operating procedures, and • Compliance with new testing criteria to be monitored with the use of stringent laboratory accreditation standards, proficiency testing, and competency assessment.

  23. Optimal Performance, Interpretation & Reporting (cont’d) • For specific recommendations and protocols review the full-text guideline at: • ASCO http://www.asco.org/guidelines/her2 • CAP http://www.cap.org • Also review the following guideline appendices in the manuscript: • Appendix C: Evidence of HER2 Status and Trastuzumab Benefit • Appendix D: Evidence of HER2 Testing Variation • Appendix E: Tissue Handling Requirements and Control Materials • Appendix F: Statistical Requirements for Assay Validation • Appendix G: Interpretation Criteria and Test Reporting of HER2 Test • Appendix H: Regulatory Requirements for Laboratories • Appendix I: International External Quality Assessment Initiatives

  24. Additional ASCO/CAP Resources • The full-text guideline as well as the following tools and resources are available at: http://www.asco.org/guidelines/her2 • Summary Slide Set • Guideline Summary • HER2 Patient Guide (at www.cancer.net) • HER2 Reporting Elements Index

  25. ASCO Guidelines

More Related