Abstract PD02-05: Comparison of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and dual-ISH (D-ISH) in the determination of HER2 status

Abstract

Abstract Introduction: The appropriate assessment of HER2 amplification status is critical to determining which patients should receive HER2-directed therapy. An alternative to FISH is D-ISH (Ventana Medical Systems Tucson, Arizona) which utilizes chromogenic HER2 and chromosome 17 probes. Both FISH and D-ISH utilize formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) human breast cancer tissue specimens. D-ISH has two principle advantages over FISH: it can be visualized using light microscopy and after analysis the specimens can be archived. Methods: We tested 250 samples with FISH and with D-ISH. Fifty specimens were controls: 25 cases with no HER2 or CEP17anomaly and 25 cases with HER2 amplification. There were also 200 test subjects of 50 cases each of chromosome 17 aneusomy, HER2 deletion (HER2/CEP17 ratio <0.8), HER2 duplication (HER2/CEP17 ratio 1.3–1.8), and equivocal results (HER2/CEP17 ratios between 1.8 and 2.2). FISH (Abbott Molecular) and D-ISH analysis were performed using methods described in the appropriate clinical kit package inserts, with the following exception: Four cases with CEP17 and HER2 co-amplification were also included and for FISH analysis these cases were reflexed to the use of chromosome 17 control probe (D17S122). Results: Four samples failed testing by D-ISH. There was a 63% (155/246) concordance between FISH and D-ISH by anomaly (aneusomy, duplication, deletion, etc.) and an 83% concordance by amplification status (non-amplified, equivocal, and amplified). D-ISH detected 18 (62%) of F-ISH-amplified cases. D-ISH resulted in lower estimates of HER2/CEP17 ratios than FISH, and many cases that were equivocal by FISH were normal by D-ISH. D-ISH did not detect HER2 amplification in any of the four HER2 and CEP17 co-amplified cases. Conclusions: We observed a lower concordance rate between FISH and D-ISH than the ∼95% rate in the D-ISH package insert. This lower concordance rate is likely a result of how this study was designed: it was biased toward common chromosome 17 anomalies and difficult specimens. Such specimens comprise about 60% of our current clinical HER2 biomarker practice. D-ISH may underestimate the HER2/CEP17 ratio, or FISH may overestimate this ratio. D-ISH also does not reliably detect HER2 amplification when the centromere of chromosome 17 is also co-amplifed. Compared to FISH, in this study cohort D-ISH had a significant false negative rate for the detection of HER2 amplification. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr PD02-05.