Abstract
Objective: To compare results of immunohistochemical (IHC) assays for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) performed on thrombin, formalin and Cellient cell blocks to those performed on tissue. Study Design: Formalin, thrombin and Cellient cell blocks were prepared from cytologic samples obtained from resection specimens of 31 patients with invasive breast carcinoma. ER, PR, HER2 and MIB-1 (Ki-67) IHC stains were performed on all three types of cell blocks and compared to the same stains performed on the patient’s paraffin-embedded biopsy or resection. Cell and tissue blocks with equivocal staining for HER2 were submitted for fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Results: Adequate Cellient blocks were obtained for all 31 cases. Comparison of results of ER IHC assays on all three types of cell blocks showed 100% correlation with tissue. Both Cellient and thrombin blocks showed 100% correlation with tissue for HER2 IHC and FISH results. The only statistically significant difference between cell block methods was found in PR staining, where false-negative results occurred with Cellient and thrombin blocks. Conclusion: Breast biomarker IHC assays performed on Cellient blocks are reliable and correlate with tissue block results, particularly for ER and HER2, the most clinically important markers.
Journal Section:
Editor's choice
References
1.
Hammond ME, Hays DF, Dowsett M, et al: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer (unabridged version). Arch Pathol Lab Med 2010;134:e48–e72.
2.
Wolff AC, Hammond EM, Schwartz JN, et al: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:118–145.
[PubMed]
3.
Phillips T, et al: Development of standard estrogen and progesterone receptor immunohistochemical assays for selection of patients for antihormonal therapy. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2007;15:325–331.
4.
Allred DC, Harvey JM, Berardo M, Clark GM: Prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer by immunohistochemical analysis. Mod Pathol 1998;11:155–168.
[PubMed]
5.
Veronese SM, Maisano C, Scibilia J: Comparative prognostic value of Ki-67 and MIB-1 proliferation indices in breast cancer. Anticancer Res 1996;16:2717–2722.
6.
Sauer T, Ebeltoft K, Pedersen MK, Karesen R: Liquid based material from fine needle aspirates from breast carcinomas offers the possibility of long-time storage without significant loss of immunoreactivity of estrogen and progesterone receptors. Cytojournal 2010;7:24.
7.
Troncone G, Panico L, Vetrani A, et al: c-erbB-2 expression in FNAB smears and matched surgical specimens of breast cancer. Diagn Cytopathol 1996;14:135–139.
8.
Railo M, Nordling S, Krogerus L, Sioris T, von Smitten K: Preoperative assessment of proliferative activity and hormone receptor status in carcinoma of the breast: a comparison of needle aspiration and needle-core biopsies to the surgical specimen. Diagn Cytopathol 1996;15:205–210.
9.
Konofaos P, Kontzoglou K, Georgoulakis J, et al: The role of ThinPrep cytology in the evaluation of estrogen and progesterone receptor content of breast tumors. Surg Oncol 2006;15:257–266.
10.
Tafjord S, Bohler PJ, Risberg B, Torlakovic E: Estrogen and progesterone receptor status in breast carcinoma: comparison of immunocytochemistry and immunohistochemistry. Diagn Cytopathol 2002;26:137–141.
11.
Cano G, Milanezi F, Leitao D, et al: Estimation of hormone receptor status in fine-needle aspirates and paraffin-embedded sections from breast cancer using the novel rabbit monoclonal antibodies SP1 and SP2. Diagn Cytopathol 2003;29:207–211.
[PubMed]
12.
Lofgren L, Skoog L, von Schoultz E: Hormone receptor status in breast cancer – a comparison between surgical specimens and fine needle aspiration biopsies. Cytopathology 2003;14:136–142.
13.
Gong Y, WF Symmans, Krishnamurthy S, Patel S, Sneige N: Optimal fixation conditions for immunocytochemical analysis of estrogen receptor in cytologic specimens of breast carcinoma. Cancer 2004;102:34–40.
14.
Goldstein NS, Ferkowicz M, Odish E, Mani A, Hastah F: Minimum formalin fixation time for consistent estrogen receptor immunohistochemical staining of invasive breast carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol 2003;120:86–92.
15.
Goldstein NS, Hunter S, Forbes S, Odish E, Tehrani M: Estrogen receptor antibody incubation time and extent of immunoreactivity in invasive carcinoma of the breast: the importance of optimizing antibody avidity. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2007;15:203–207.
16.
Qiu J, Kulkarni S, Chandrasekhar R, et al: Effect of delayed formalin fixation on estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer: a study of three different clones. Am J Clin Pathol 2010;134:813–819.
17.
Khoury T, Sait S, Hwang H, et al: Delay to formalin fixation effect on breast biomarkers. Mod Pathol 2009;22:1457–1467.
18.
Oyama T, Ishikawa Y, Hayashi M, Arihiro K, Horiguchi J: The effects of fixation, processing and evaluation criteria on immunohistochemical detection of hormone receptors in breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2007;14:182–188.
19.
Allred DC: Issues and updates: evaluating estrogen receptor-α, progesterone receptor, and HER2 in breast cancer. Mod Pathol 2010;23:S52–S59.
20.
Gown AM: Current issues in ER and HER2 testing by IHC in breast cancer. Mod Pathol 2008;21:S8–S15.
21.
Hanley KZ, Birdsong GG, Cohen C, Siddiqui MT: Immunohistochemical detection of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 expression in breast carcinomas: comparison on cell block, needle-core, and tissue block preparations. Cancer 2009;117:279–288.
22.
Williams SL, Birdsong GG, Cohen C, Siddiqui MT: Immunohistochemical detection of estrogen and progesterone receptor and Her2 expression in breast carcinomas: comparison of cell block and tissue block preparations. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2009;2:476–480.
23.
Shabaik A, Lin G, Peterson M, et al: Reliability of Her2/neu, estrogen receptor, and progesterone receptor testing by immunohistochemistry on cell block of FNA and serous effusions from patients with primary and metastatic breast carcinoma. Diagn Cytopathol 2011;39:328–332.
24.
Wagner DG, Russell DK, Benson JM, et al: Cellient™ automated cell block versus traditional cell block preparation: a comparison of morphological features and immunohistochemical staining. Diagn Cytopathol 2011;10:730–736.
25.
Akalin A, Lu D, Woda B, Moss L, Fischer A: Rapid cell blocks improve accuracy of breast FNAs beyond that provided by conventional cell blocks regardless of immediate adequacy evaluation. Diagn Cytopathol 2008;36:523–529.
26.
Beatty B, Bryant R, Wang W, et al: HER-2/neu detection in fine needle aspirates of breast cancer. Am J Clin Pathol 2004;122:246–255.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
2012
You do not currently have access to this content.
