A model for the impact of FFPE section thickness on gene copy number measurement by FISH

UK recommendations for HER2 assessment in breast cancer: an update

The last UK breast cancer (BC) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing guideline recommendations were published in 2015. Since then, new data and therapeutic strategies have emerged. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) published a focused update in 2018 that reclassified in situ hybridisation (ISH) Group 2 (immunohistochemistry (IHC) score 2+and HER2/chromosome enumeration probe 17 (CEP17) ratio ≥2.0 and HER2 copy number <4.0 signals/cell), as well as addressed other concerns raised by previous guidelines. The present article further refines UK guidelines, with specific attention to definitions of HER2 status focusing on eight key areas: (1) HER2 equivocal (IHC 2+) and assignment of the ASCO/CAP ISH group 2 tumours; (2) the definition of the group of BCs with low IHC scores for HER2 with emphasis on the distinction between IHC score 1+ (HER2-Low) from HER2 IHC score 0 (HER2 negative); (3) reporting cases showing HER2 heterogeneity; (4) HER2 testing in specific settings, including on cytological material; (5) repeat HER2 testing, (6) HER2 testing turnaround time targets; (7) the potential role of next generation sequencing and other diagnostic molecular assays for routine testing of HER2 status in BC and (8) use of image analysis to score HER2 IHC. The two tiered system of HER2 assessment remains unchanged, with first line IHC and then ISH limited to IHC equivocal cases (IHC score 2+) but emerging data on the relationship between IHC scores and levels of response to anti-HER2 therapy are considered. Here, we present the latest UK recommendations for HER2 status evaluation in BC, and where relevant, the differences from other published guidelines.

Risk Reclassification of Patients with Endometrial Cancer Based on Tumor Molecular Profiling: First Real World Data

Recently, guidelines for endometrial cancer (EC) were released that guide treatment decisions according to the tumors' molecular profiles. To date, no real-world data regarding the clinical feasibility of molecular profiling have been released. This retrospective, monocentric study investigated the clinical feasibility of molecular profiling and its potential impact on treatment decisions. Tumor specimens underwent molecular profiling (testing for genetic alterations, (immune-)histological examination of lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), and L1CAM) as part of the clinical routine and were classified according to the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) classification system and to an integrated molecular risk stratification. Shifts between risk groups and potential treatment alterations are described. A total of 60 cases were included, of which twelve were excluded (20%), and eight of the remaining 48 were not characterized (drop-out rate of 16.7%). Molecular profiling revealed 4, 6, 25, and 5 patients with DNA polymerase-epsilon mutation, microsatellite instability, no specific molecular profile, and TP53 mutation, respectively. Three patients had substantial LVSI, and four patients showed high L1CAM expression. Molecular profiling took a median of 18.5 days. Substantial shifts occurred between the classification systems: four patients were upstaged, and 19 patients were downstaged. Molecular profiling of EC specimens is feasible in a daily routine, and new risk classification systems will change treatment decisions substantially.