Reliability of Prognostic and Predictive Factors Evaluated by Needle Core Biopsies of Large Breast Invasive Tumors

Place des biopsies liquides dans le diagnostic et la caractérisation moléculaire des cancers du sein

The tumor biopsy remains essential for breast cancer diagnosis and characterization. Indeed, the treatment is decided according to histological subtype, and according to the presence of targetable molecular alterations. Notably, the presence of hormone receptors, ERBB2 hyperexpression or the existence of PIK3CA or ESR1 mutations are among the alterations commonly investigated. But these biological characteristics are determined only partially by tumor biopsy, due to tumor heterogeneity or tumor plasticity that happens spontaneously or under treatment. Liquid biopsy, and in particular circulating tumor DNA and circulating tumor cells, is a non-invasive method to identify and characterize the presence of cancer in the blood. The aim of this review is to determine the value of liquid biopsy to enhance or replace the data provided by a tumor biopsy.

Concordance between core needle biopsy and surgical excision specimens for Ki-67 in breast cancer - a systematic review of the literature

AIMS

The biomarkers oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) are routinely measured in patients with breast cancer with international consensus on how they should be interpreted. There is evidence to support use of other biomarkers to give more detailed predictive and prognostic information. Ki-67 is one example, and measures the proliferative activity of cancer cells. It is important that this can be performed at diagnosis of breast cancer for patients who do not have initial surgical treatment (mainly older women) and those receiving neoadjuvant therapies.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic review was performed to assess concordance of measurement of Ki-67 between core needle biopsy (CNB) samples and surgical excision (SE) samples in patients with invasive breast cancer. MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched. Studies were eligible if performed within the last 10 years; included quantitative measurement of Ki-67 in both CNB and SE samples with no prior breast cancer treatment; measured concordance between two samples; and had full text available. A total of 22 studies, including 5982 paired CNB and SE samples on which Ki-67 was measured, were appraised. Overall, there appeared to be concordance; however, reliability was unclear. Where given, the Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ) of correlation between samples ranged from 0.261 to 0.712. The concordance rate between CNB and SE where measured as a percentage had a range from 70.3 to 92.7% CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of level of concordance of Ki-67 between CNB and SE samples is hampered by different methodologies. International consensus on Ki-67 measurement is urgently needed.

Review ctDNA and Breast Cancer

In only few years, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in breast cancer has moved from purely fundamental research to nearby daily use for treatment selection and drug-resistance assessment. Indeed, technical advances and widespread use of next-generation sequencing or digital PCR allowed for detection of very low amount of tumor DNA in bloodstream. The use of ctDNA as liquid biopsy able either to monitor tumor burden under treatment or to overcome tumor heterogeneity and identify potential targetable drivers. Time has come to define how ctDNA can be implemented for early or metastatic breast cancer management. Data from retrospective analyses of prospective trials have recently highlighted the potential advantages but also the limitations of ctDNA, in particular for patients under endocrine therapy.

The evolving role of receptors as predictive biomarkers for metastatic breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

In breast cancer, estrogen receptor (ER) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) are essential biomarkers to predict response to endocrine and anti-HER2 therapies, respectively. In metastatic breast cancer, the use of these receptors and targeted therapies present additional challenges: temporal heterogeneity, together with limited sampling methodologies, hinders receptor status assessment, and the constant evolution of the disease invariably leads to resistance to treatment. Areas covered: This review summarizes the genomic abnormalities in ER and HER2, such as mutations, amplifications, translocations, and alternative splicing, emerging as novel biomarkers that provide an insight into underlying mechanisms of resistance and hold potential predictive value to inform treatment selection. We also describe how liquid biopsies for sampling of circulating markers and ultrasensitive detection technologies have emerged which complement ongoing efforts for biomarker discovery and analysis. Expert commentary: While evidence suggests that genomic aberrations in ER and HER2 could contribute to meeting the pressing need for better predictive biomarkers, efforts need to be made to standardize assessment methods and better understand the resistance mechanisms these markers denote. Taking advantage of emerging technologies, research in upcoming years should include prospective trials incorporating these predictors into the study design to validate their potential clinical value.

Core needle biopsy as an alternative to whole section in IHC4 score assessment for breast cancer prognostication

AIMS

IHC4 score, based on expression of four routine markers (oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and proliferation marker, Ki67), is a recently developed, cost-effective prognostic tool in breast cancer. Possibly, the score may be useful also in advanced diseases where only core needle biopsy (CNB) is available and neoadjuvant therapy. However, its studies on CNB are scant. This study examined whether IHC4 score assessment on CNB is comparable to that from whole section (WS).

METHODS

Immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis was performed for ER, PR, HER2 and Ki67 on 108 paired CNB and WS to evaluate IHC4 score (with follow-up range 1-230 months and 5 relapse/death). Concordance between the two was examined. Factors that affected the concordance were analysed. Additionally, IHC4 score was compared with Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI).

RESULTS

There was moderate concordance between IHC4 score on CNB and WS (all cases: κ=0.699, p<0.001; ER+ cases: κ=0.595, p<0.001). Among the IHC4 components, concordance for HER2 was the poorest (κ=0.178, p<0.001 in all cases; ER+ cases: κ=0.082, p<0.097). Significant factors affecting concordance between CNB and WS included number of cores, total core length and percentage of tumour cells in cores (p≤0.030), indicating the importance of sufficient sampling. Interestingly, the concordance was also affected by patients' age (p=0.039). There was poor agreement between IHC4 score and NPI (κ≤0.160).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggested that IHC4 score can be used on adequately sampled CNB. Its poor agreement with NPI highlights the independence of the two factors.

CD8+ T cell infiltration in breast and colon cancer: A histologic and statistical analysis

The prevalence of cytotoxic tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) has demonstrated prognostic value in multiple tumor types. In particular, CD8 counts (in combination with CD3 and CD45RO) have been shown to be superior to traditional UICC staging in colon cancer patients and higher total CD8 counts have been associated with better survival in breast cancer patients. However, immune infiltrate heterogeneity can lead to potentially significant misrepresentations of marker prevalence in routine histologic sections. We examined step sections of breast and colorectal cancer samples for CD8+ T cell prevalence by standard chromogenic immunohistochemistry to determine marker variability and inform practice of T cell biomarker assessment in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue samples. Stained sections were digitally imaged and CD8+ lymphocytes within defined regions of interest (ROI) including the tumor and surrounding stroma were enumerated. Statistical analyses of CD8+ cell count variability using a linear model/ANOVA framework between patients as well as between levels within a patient sample were performed. Our results show that CD8+ T-cell distribution is highly homogeneous within a standard tissue sample in both colorectal and breast carcinomas. As such, cytotoxic T cell prevalence by immunohistochemistry on a single level or even from a subsample of biopsy fragments taken from that level can be considered representative of cytotoxic T cell infiltration for the entire tumor section within the block. These findings support the technical validity of biomarker strategies relying on CD8 immunohistochemistry.

Comparison of Core Needle Biopsy and Excision Specimens for the Accurate Evaluation of Breast Cancer Molecular Markers: a Report of 1003 Cases

In this study, we compared the accuracy of marker evaluation in core needle biopsy (CNB) specimens versus excision specimens (ESs) from breast cancer patients. This retrospective study used data collected from the breast cancer database at the West China Hospital, China. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) results from CNB specimens and ESs were compared, using estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and Ki-67 as markers. Molecular subtyping and endocrine therapy usage correlations based on CNB samples and ESs were evaluated. The results obtained from CNB samples and ESs exhibited substantial agreement for the detection of ER (κ = 0.522), PR (κ = 0.441), and HER2 (κ = 0.451), and also influenced endocrine therapy usage. Fair and poor correlations were observed for Ki-67 staining and molecular subtyping (κ = 0.195), respectively. This disagreement might be attributable to a combination of heterogeneity and large tumor size. This study indicates that the discordance rate in molecular marker staining between CNB specimens and ESs is significant enough that results obtained with CNB specimens should be used cautiously or verified using ESs.

Estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 expression in breast cancer FNA cell blocks and paired histologic specimens: A large retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Molecular analysis represents an increasingly important component of the pathologic examination of tumor specimens. Notably, the characterization of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression in breast cancer specimens provides critical prognostic and predictive information. The objective of the current study was to compare the concordance of these markers as determined on fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cell blocks compared with tissue blocks prepared from surgical specimens.

METHODS

A total of 134 cases of breast carcinoma were identified from 2002 through 2014 with both FNA cell blocks (fixed in 10% formalin) and corresponding available tissue blocks and ER, PR, and HER2 were characterized in both specimens. Negative and positive concordances were determined for ER and PR in cell blocks compared with tissue blocks, and for HER2 immunohistochemistry on cell blocks and tissue blocks versus the corresponding reference method, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH).

RESULTS

Concordance for ER expression evaluated on a cell block compared with the corresponding tissue block was 96.2%. Concordance for PR expression was 77.5%. Overall agreement of HER2 FISH testing between cell blocks and tissue blocks was 96.7%. For both cell blocks and tissue blocks, HER2 expression by immunohistochemistry demonstrated ≥98% positive and negative concordance with the FISH reference method.

CONCLUSIONS

ER, PR, and HER2 determination on FNA-acquired cell block (fixed exclusively in 10% formalin) showed excellent agreement for ER and HER2 and moderate agreement for PR with the corresponding tissue block. These findings support the equivalency of ER and HER2 evaluation performed on FNA cell blocks compared with surgical tissue blocks. Cancer Cytopathol 2016;124:828-35. © 2016 American Cancer Society.