An Evaluation of Clinicopathological Correlation and Outcome of Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Subgroups Reclassified According to the Latest ASCO/CAP Guideline

Chao Wang,Julia Y Tsang,Ivan K Poon,Yan Shao,Joshua J Li,Ka-Ho Shea,Thazin Hlaing,Sio-In Wong,Gary M Tse,Julia Y. Tsang,Ivan K. Poon,Joshua J. Li,Gary M. Tse
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2021.05.005
IF: 3.078
2022-01-01
Clinical Breast Cancer
Abstract:<h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Background</h3><p>The latest CAP/ASCO guideline has updated the interpretation of uncommon HER2 in situ hybridization patterns (groups 2-4) with concomitant HER2 immunohistochemistry, leading to changes in diagnosis of these subgroups. We sought to assess the clinico-pathologic features and outcome in these subgroups in details with our local cohort.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Methods</h3><p>Clinico-pathologic features of groups 2-4 were compared to the typical amplified (group 1: HER2:CEP17≥2, HER2≥4) and non-amplified (group 5: HER2:CEP17&lt;2, HER2&lt;4) groups.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Results</h3><p>Group 2 (HER2:CEP17≥2, HER2&lt;4) cases showed lower Ki67 expression and grade (p≤.002) than group 1, but no differences with group 5. Group 4(HER2:CEP17&lt;2, HER2= 4-6) cases were associated with less necrosis, more ER positivity, lower grade, more nodal metastases and more special histotypes (p≤.037) than group 1, but with higher grade and more nodal metastases (p≤.021) than group 5. Except for presenting as a larger tumor and of special histotypes, group 3 (HER2:CEP17&lt;2, HER2 ≥6) cases showed no other significant differences from group 1, but were of higher grade and Ki67 level than groups 2, 4 and 5. Group 4, similar to group 5, showed worse survival than group 1 (DFS: log rank=5.547, p=.019; OS: log rank=4.678, p=.031). The rate of relapse was similar in group 4 with and without anti-HER2 therapy, albeit with limited cases.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Conclusion</h3><p>Our findings showed more similarities among group 2, 4 and 5 than with group 1 and 3, supporting the HER2 categorization in the latest guideline. Additional studies may be warranted to assess the outcome of these patients with the different managements.</p><p><strong>Micro-abstract</strong></p><p>The latest update re-categorized the diagnosis of HER2 uncommon ISH categories. Despite that, there are no robust clinical evidence to support this categorization. In this study, we sought to compare the clinico-pathologic characteristics and outcome of these groups with the typical amplified and non-amplified cases to gain further insights into their biology and the relevance of their revised classification.</p>
oncology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?