A dedicated structured data set for reporting of invasive carcinoma of the breast in the setting of neoadjuvant therapy: recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR)

AIMS

The International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR), a global alliance of major (inter-)national pathology and cancer organisations, is an initiative aimed at providing a unified international approach to reporting cancer. ICCR recently published new data sets for the reporting of invasive breast carcinoma, surgically removed lymph nodes for breast tumours and ductal carcinoma in situ, variants of lobular carcinoma in situ and low-grade lesions. The data set in this paper addresses the neoadjuvant setting. The aim is to promote high-quality, standardised reporting of tumour response and residual disease after neoadjuvant treatment that can be used for subsequent management decisions for each patient.

METHODS

The ICCR convened expert panels of breast pathologists with a representative surgeon and oncologist to critically review and discuss current evidence. Feedback from the international public consultation was critical in the development of this data set.

RESULTS

The expert panel concluded that a dedicated data set was required for reporting of breast specimens post-neoadjuvant therapy with inclusion of data elements specific to the neoadjuvant setting as core or non-core elements. This data set proposes a practical approach for handling and reporting breast resection specimens following neoadjuvant therapy. The comments for each data element clarify terminology, discuss available evidence and highlight areas with limited evidence that need further study. This data set overlaps with, and should be used in conjunction with, the data sets for the reporting of invasive breast carcinoma and surgically removed lymph nodes from patients with breast tumours, as appropriate. Key issues specific to the neoadjuvant setting are included in this paper. The entire data set is freely available on the ICCR website.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality, standardised reporting of tumour response and residual disease after neoadjuvant treatment are critical for subsequent management decisions for each patient.

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and breast cancer mortality in racially and ethnically diverse participants of the Northern California Breast Cancer Family Registry

Stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (sTIL) enrichment in pretreatment breast tumors has been associated with superior response to neoadjuvant treatment and survival. In a population-based cohort, we studied sTIL-survival associations by race and ethnicity. We assessed associations of continuous sTIL scores and sTIL-enriched breast cancers (defined as percent lymphocytic infiltration of tumor stroma or cell nests at cutoffs of 30%, 50%, and 70%) with clinical and epidemiologic characteristics and conducted multivariable survival analyses. Although we identified no difference in sTIL score by race and ethnicity, higher continuous sTIL score was associated with lower breast cancer-specific mortality only among non-Hispanic White and Asian American but not African American and Hispanic women. This finding suggests that complex factors influence treatment response and survival, given that sTIL enrichment was not associated with a survival advantage among women from minoritized groups, who more often experience health disparities. Further study of patient selection for sTIL-guided treatment strategies is warranted.

Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Testing in Breast Cancer

PURPOSE.—

To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology-College of American Pathologists (ASCO-CAP) recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing in breast cancer. An Update Panel is aware that a new generation of antibody-drug conjugates targeting the HER2 protein is active against breast cancers that lack protein overexpression or gene amplification.

METHODS.—

The Update Panel conducted a systematic literature review to identify signals for updating recommendations.

RESULTS.—

The search identified 173 abstracts. Of 5 potential publications reviewed, none constituted a signal for revising existing recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS.—

The 2018 ASCO-CAP recommendations for HER2 testing are affirmed.

DISCUSSION.—

HER2 testing guidelines have focused on identifying HER2 protein overexpression or gene amplification in breast cancer to identify patients for therapies that disrupt HER2 signaling. This update acknowledges a new indication for trastuzumab deruxtecan when HER2 is not overexpressed or amplified but is immunohistochemistry (IHC) 1+ or 2+ without amplification by in situ hybridization. Clinical trial data on tumors that tested IHC 0 are limited (excluded from DESTINY-Breast04), and evidence is lacking that these cancers behave differently or do not respond similarly to newer HER2 antibody-drug conjugates. Although current data do not support a new IHC 0 versus 1+ prognostic or predictive threshold for response to trastuzumab deruxtecan, this threshold is now relevant because of the trial entry criteria that supported its new regulatory approval. Therefore, although it is premature to create new result categories of HER2 expression (eg, HER2-Low, HER2-Ultra-Low), best practices to distinguish IHC 0 from 1+ are now clinically relevant. This update affirms prior HER2 reporting recommendations and offers a new HER2 testing reporting comment to highlight the current relevance of IHC 0 versus 1+ results and best practice recommendations to distinguish these often subtle differences. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Chemotherapy and Targeted Therapy for Endocrine-Pretreated or Hormone Receptor-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer and Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Testing in Breast Cancer: ASCO Guideline Rapid Recommendation Update Q and A

5 med onc and path leaders help clinicians with HER2-low ADC decisions re patients, sequence, and AE

Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Testing in Breast Cancer: ASCO-College of American Pathologists Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To update ASCO-College of American Pathologists (CAP) recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing in breast cancer. The Panel is aware that a new generation of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) targeting the HER2 protein is active against breast cancers that lack protein overexpression or gene amplification.

METHODS

An Update Panel conducted a systematic literature review to identify signals for updating recommendations.

RESULTS

The search identified 173 abstracts. Of five potential publications reviewed, none constituted a signal for revising existing recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The 2018 ASCO-CAP recommendations for HER2 testing are affirmed.

DISCUSSION

HER2 testing guidelines have focused on identifying HER2 protein overexpression or gene amplification in breast cancer to identify patients for therapies that disrupt HER2 signaling. This update acknowledges a new indication for trastuzumab deruxtecan when HER2 is not overexpressed or amplified but is immunohistochemistry (IHC) 1+ or 2+ without amplification by in situ hybridization. Clinical trial data on tumors that tested IHC 0 are limited (excluded from DESTINY-Breast04), and evidence is lacking that these cancers behave differently or do not respond similarly to newer HER2 ADCs. Although current data do not support a new IHC 0 versus 1+ prognostic or predictive threshold for response to trastuzumab deruxtecan, this threshold is now relevant because of the trial entry criteria that supported its new regulatory approval. Therefore, while it is premature to create new result categories of HER2 expression (eg, HER2-Low, HER2-Ultra-Low), best practices to distinguish IHC 0 from 1+ are now clinically relevant. This Update affirms prior HER2 reporting recommendations and offers a new HER2 testing reporting comment to highlight the current relevance of IHC 0 versus 1+ results and best practice recommendations to distinguish these often subtle differences.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Breast Cancer, Version 4.2023

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Breast Cancer address all aspects of management for breast cancer. The treatment landscape of metastatic breast cancer is evolving constantly. The therapeutic strategy takes into consideration tumor biology, biomarkers, and other clinical factors. Due to the growing number of treatment options, if one option fails, there is usually another line of therapy available, providing meaningful improvements in survival. This NCCN Guidelines Insights report focuses on recent updates specific to systemic therapy recommendations for patients with stage IV (M1) disease.

Breast Cancer, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The therapeutic options for patients with noninvasive or invasive breast cancer are complex and varied. These NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer include recommendations for clinical management of patients with carcinoma in situ, invasive breast cancer, Paget disease, phyllodes tumor, inflammatory breast cancer, and management of breast cancer during pregnancy. The content featured in this issue focuses on the recommendations for overall management of ductal carcinoma in situ and the workup and locoregional management of early stage invasive breast cancer. For the full version of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer, visit NCCN.org.

Biomarkers for Adjuvant Endocrine and Chemotherapy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To update recommendations on appropriate use of breast cancer biomarker assay results to guide adjuvant endocrine and chemotherapy decisions in early-stage breast cancer.

METHODS

An updated literature search identified randomized clinical trials and prospective-retrospective studies published from January 2016 to October 2021. Outcomes of interest included overall survival and disease-free or recurrence-free survival. Expert Panel members used informal consensus to develop evidence-based recommendations.

RESULTS

The search identified 24 studies informing the evidence base.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Clinicians may use Oncotype DX, MammaPrint, Breast Cancer Index (BCI), and EndoPredict to guide adjuvant endocrine and chemotherapy in patients who are postmenopausal or age > 50 years with early-stage estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative (ER+ and HER2-) breast cancer that is node-negative or with 1-3 positive nodes. Prosigna and BCI may be used in postmenopausal patients with node-negative ER+ and HER2- breast cancer. In premenopausal patients, clinicians may use Oncotype in patients with node-negative ER+ and HER2- breast cancer. Current data suggest that premenopausal patients with 1-3 positive nodes benefit from chemotherapy regardless of genomic assay result. There are no data on use of genomic tests to guide adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with ≥ 4 positive nodes. Ki67 combined with other parameters or immunohistochemistry 4 score may be used in postmenopausal patients without access to genomic tests to guide adjuvant therapy decisions. BCI may be offered to patients with 0-3 positive nodes who received 5 years of endocrine therapy without evidence of recurrence to guide decisions about extended endocrine therapy. None of the assays are recommended for treatment guidance in individuals with HER2-positive or triple-negative breast cancer. Treatment decisions should also consider disease stage, comorbidities, and patient preferences.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

HER2 Testing: Insights From Pathologists' Perspective on Technically Challenging HER2 FISH Cases

OBJECTIVE

College of American Pathologists and the American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines provide straightforward criteria for HER2 interpretation in breast carcinomas; however, a subset of cases present unusual diagnostic dilemmas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten challenging HER2 fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) cases were selected for analysis. The study included a variety of problematic cases such as those with discordant immunohistochemistry (IHC) and FISH results, cases with high intratumoral variability in HER2 copy number, a case with a highly amplified clone in 5% to 10% of the tumor sample, and a case with tumor cells containing tightly clumped HER2 signals. Six high volume HER2 FISH laboratories performed and interpreted HER2 FISH (adding HER2 IHC if necessary). Interpretation strategies were discussed.

RESULTS

There was 100% concordance between laboratories in 4/10 cases. Tumors with increased intratumoral variability (tumors with high variability in HER2 copy number per cell but which otherwise do not fulfill College of American Pathologists and the American Society of Clinical Oncology criteria for heterogeneity) exhibited 100% concordance in 3/4 cases, but 1 case had only 50% agreement. Low positive HER2 cases (group 1 cases with <6 average HER2 copies/cell) had 1 laboratory disagreeing with the majority in 4/4 cases, and this was the only category with discordance between IHC and FISH methodologies. All laboratories identified the case with heterogeneity and interpreted it as positive. Five of the 6 laboratories interpreted the case with tightly clustered HER2 signals as positive.

CONCLUSIONS

This study offers specific observations and interpretation strategies that laboratories can use when confronted with difficult HER 2 cases. It then highlights communication strategies a laboratory may use to discuss these unusual HER2 results with the clinical team.

Quantification of Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 by Immunopeptide Enrichment and Targeted Mass Spectrometry in Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded and Frozen Breast Cancer Tissues

BACKGROUND

Conventional HER2-targeting therapies improve outcomes for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (BC), defined as tumors showing HER2 protein overexpression by immunohistochemistry and/or ERBB2 gene amplification determined by in situ hybridization (ISH). Emerging HER2-targeting compounds show benefit in some patients with neither HER2 protein overexpression nor ERBB2 gene amplification, creating a need for new assays to select HER2-low tumors for treatment with these compounds. We evaluated the analytical performance of a targeted mass spectrometry-based assay for quantifying HER2 protein in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) and frozen BC biopsies.

METHODS

We used immunoaffinity-enrichment coupled to multiple reaction monitoring-mass spectrometry (immuno-MRM-MS) to quantify HER2 protein (as peptide GLQSLPTHDPSPLQR) in 96 frozen and 119 FFPE BC biopsies. We characterized linearity, lower limit of quantification (LLOQ), and intra- and inter-day variation of the assay in frozen and FFPE tissue matrices. We determined concordance between HER2 immuno-MRM-MS and predicate immunohistochemistry and ISH assays and examined the benefit of multiplexing the assay to include proteins expressed in tumor subcompartments (e.g., stroma, adipose, lymphocytes, epithelium) to account for tissue heterogeneity.

RESULTS

HER2 immuno-MRM-MS assay linearity was ≥103, assay coefficient of variation was 7.8% (FFPE) and 5.9% (frozen) for spiked-in analyte, and 7.7% (FFPE) and 7.9% (frozen) for endogenous measurements. Immuno-MRM-MS-based HER2 measurements strongly correlated with predicate assay HER2 determinations, and concordance was improved by normalizing to glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase. HER2 was quantified above the LLOQ in all tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

Immuno-MRM-MS can be used to quantify HER2 in FFPE and frozen BC biopsies, even at low HER2 expression levels.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Breast Cancer, Version 4.2021

The NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer include up-to-date guidelines for clinical management of patients with carcinoma in situ, invasive breast cancer, Paget disease, phyllodes tumor, inflammatory breast cancer, male breast cancer, and breast cancer during pregnancy. These guidelines are developed by a multidisciplinary panel of representatives from NCCN Member Institutions with breast cancer-focused expertise in the fields of medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, pathology, reconstructive surgery, and patient advocacy. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the most recent updates to recommendations for adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with nonmetastatic, early-stage, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.

HER2 Dual In Situ Hybridization: Correlations and Cautions

CONTEXT.—

Accurate HER2 testing in breast cancer is crucial for appropriate precision therapy. HER2 testing is most commonly accomplished by a combination of immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization techniques, as gene amplification is closely tied to protein overexpression. During the last 5+ years, brightfield dual in situ hybridization (DISH) has replaced fluorescence methods (fluorescence in situ hybridization [FISH]) in some laboratories.

OBJECTIVE.—

To analyze routine HER2 DISH performance in the field.

DESIGN.—

We reviewed our experience with HER2 DISH performed at outside laboratories and referred for patient care.

RESULTS.—

Of 273 identified retrospective DISH results, 55 had repeated FISH testing at our institution; 7 (13%) were discordant. Additional cases had technical flaws hampering appropriate scoring. In 23 cases (42%), HER2 DISH was performed without immunohistochemistry. Slide review of a prospective cohort of 42 consecutive DISH cases revealed 14 (33%) with technical or interpretative limitations potentially jeopardizing results. Commonly identified problems include lack of or weak signals in most tumor cells, and silver precipitate or red signals outside of nuclei, resulting in false-negative or false-positive interpretations, respectively. Further, 44% (24 of 55) of DISH reports lacked complete data, specifically average HER2 signals/cell.

CONCLUSIONS.—

While HER2 DISH can be an efficient and effective alternative to FISH, we illustrate pitfalls and reinforce that careful attention to slide quality and technical parameters are critically important. HER2 DISH cotesting with immunohistochemistry could help minimize false-negative or false-positive HER2 results.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Breast Cancer, Version 3.2018

These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight the updated recommendations for use of multigene assays to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic chemotherapy therapy for women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early-stage invasive breast cancer. This report summarizes these updates and discusses the rationale behind them.

Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guideline Update

PURPOSE.—

To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline.

METHODS.—

A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature.

RECOMMENDATIONS.—

The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: ASCO/CAP Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

The path to a better biomarker: application of a risk management framework for the implementation of PD-L1 and TILs as immuno-oncology biomarkers in breast cancer clinical trials and daily practice

Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies targeting PD-1/PD-L1 are now the standard of care in oncology across several hematologic and solid tumor types, including triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Patients with metastatic or locally advanced TNBC with PD-L1 expression on immune cells occupying ≥1% of tumor area demonstrated survival benefit with the addition of atezolizumab to nab-paclitaxel. However, concerns regarding variability between immunohistochemical PD-L1 assay performance and inter-reader reproducibility have been raised. High tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have also been associated with response to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with breast cancer (BC). TILs can be easily assessed on hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides and have shown reliable inter-reader reproducibility. As an established prognostic factor in early stage TNBC, TILs are soon anticipated to be reported in daily practice in many pathology laboratories worldwide. Because TILs and PD-L1 are parts of an immunological spectrum in BC, we propose the systematic implementation of combined PD-L1 and TIL analyses as a more comprehensive immuno-oncological biomarker for patient selection for PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition-based therapy in patients with BC. Although practical and regulatory considerations differ by jurisdiction, the pathology community has the responsibility to patients to implement assays that lead to optimal patient selection. We propose herewith a risk-management framework that may help mitigate the risks of suboptimal patient selection for immuno-therapeutic approaches in clinical trials and daily practice based on combined TILs/PD-L1 assessment in BC. © 2020 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Breast Cancer, Version 3.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Several new systemic therapy options have become available for patients with metastatic breast cancer, which have led to improvements in survival. In addition to patient and clinical factors, the treatment selection primarily depends on the tumor biology (hormone-receptor status and HER2-status). The NCCN Guidelines specific to the workup and treatment of patients with recurrent/stage IV breast cancer are discussed in this article.

Quantitative Image Analysis of Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Immunohistochemistry for Breast Cancer: Guideline From the College of American Pathologists

CONTEXT.—

Advancements in genomic, computing, and imaging technology have spurred new opportunities to use quantitative image analysis (QIA) for diagnostic testing.

OBJECTIVE.—

To develop evidence-based recommendations to improve accuracy, precision, and reproducibility in the interpretation of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) immunohistochemistry (IHC) for breast cancer where QIA is used.

DESIGN.—

The College of American Pathologists (CAP) convened a panel of pathologists, histotechnologists, and computer scientists with expertise in image analysis, immunohistochemistry, quality management, and breast pathology to develop recommendations for QIA of HER2 IHC in breast cancer. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to address 5 key questions. Final recommendations were derived from strength of evidence, open comment feedback, expert panel consensus, and advisory panel review.

RESULTS.—

Eleven recommendations were drafted: 7 based on CAP laboratory accreditation requirements and 4 based on expert consensus opinions. A 3-week open comment period received 180 comments from more than 150 participants.

CONCLUSIONS.—

To improve accurate, precise, and reproducible interpretation of HER2 IHC results for breast cancer, QIA and procedures must be validated before implementation, followed by regular maintenance and ongoing evaluation of quality control and quality assurance. HER2 QIA performance, interpretation, and reporting should be supervised by pathologists with expertise in QIA.

Role of Patient and Disease Factors in Adjuvant Systemic Therapy Decision Making for Early-Stage, Operable Breast Cancer: Update of the ASCO Endorsement of the Cancer Care Ontario Guideline

PURPOSE

To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology endorsement of the Cancer Care Ontario recommendations on the Role of Patient and Disease Factors in Adjuvant Systemic Therapy Decision Making for Early-Stage, Operable Breast Cancer.

METHODS

Two phase III trials—the Trial Assigning Individualized Options for Treatment (TAILORx) in women with hormone receptor–positive, node-negative tumors and the Microarray in Node-Negative and 1 to 3 Positive Lymph Node Disease May Avoid Chemotherapy (MINDACT) trial—provided the evidence for this update.

UPDATED RECOMMENDATIONS

Shared decision making between clinicians and patients is appropriate for adjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer. For patients older than age 50 years and whose tumors have Onco type DX recurrence scores less than 26, and for patients age 50 years or younger whose tumors have Onco type DX recurrence scores less than 16, there is little to no benefit from chemotherapy. Clinicians may offer endocrine therapy alone for these patients. For patients age 50 years or younger with recurrence scores of 16 to 25, clinicians may offer chemoendocrine therapy. Patients with recurrence scores greater than 30 should be considered candidates for chemoendocrine therapy. Based on informal consensus, the Panel recommends that oncologists may offer chemoendocrine therapy to patients with Onco type DX scores of 26 to 30. The MammaPrint assay could be used to guide decisions on withholding adjuvant systemic chemotherapy in patients with hormone receptor–positive lymph node–negative breast cancer and in select patients with lymph node–positive cancers. In both patients with node-positive and node-negative disease, evidence of clinical utility of the MammaPrint assay was only apparent in those determined to be at high clinical risk; the Panel thus did not recommend use of MammaPrint assay in patients determined to be at low clinical risk. Remaining recommendations from the 2016 ASCO guideline endorsement are unchanged. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

HER2 testing: Insights from pathologists’ perspective on challenging HER2 cases

e12512

Background: HER2 status dictates treatment decisions in breast cancer making the precision and accuracy of laboratory testing essential. While most HER2 testing is straightforward using ASCO-CAP interpretation guidelines, 5% of cases fall into the less common categories (groups 2-4) and can present unusual diagnostic dilemmas. 6 high volume HER2 FISH laboratories evaluated 10 challenging HER2 cases. The results highlight the challenges and potential for variability in interpreting rare cases with unusual results. Methods: Ten diagnostically challenging HER2 FISH cases were selected from our breast cancer archives (41 months/3863 cases). Unstained slides were evaluated by 6 high volume laboratories. Laboratories performed HER2 FISH testing (along with HER2 IHC as needed) and rendered an interpretation. Participants discussed results during a conference call. Cases included the following situations: low-level amplification (ratio ≥ 2.0, mean HER2 signals/cell between 4.0-5.9), HER2 mean copy number or ratio near a clinically actionable threshold, complex heterogeneity or clones, and a technical challenge (signal clustering). Results: All laboratories elected to perform HER2 IHC in conjunction with FISH in all cases. Only 3/10 cases resulted in 100% agreement between the 6 institutions, all of which were in the category addressing complex heterogeneity. During the study, we identified a problematic subset (low amplified FISH cases) which may have discordant (negative) IHC results. Another problematic scenario is the finding of a small, highly amplified HER2 clone. Lastly, we identified cases with high cell to cell variability, and we saw discordant values resulting in disparate overall HER2 interpretations. Conclusions: Oncologists and pathologists should be aware of these challenges and the potential for variability in interpretation of these rare case scenarios. Evaluation for concordance between IHC and FISH results, correlation with other clinico-pathologic features and additional steps to ensure the accuracy of test results can help resolve unusual results, but grey zones may still remain and should be discussed when making clinical decisions based on HER2 test results.

Pretreatment Tattoo Marking of Suspicious Axillary Lymph Nodes: Reliability and Correlation with Sentinel Lymph Node

BACKGROUND

Tattooing is an alternative method for marking biopsied axillary lymph nodes (ALNs) before initiation of treatments for newly diagnosed breast cancer. Detection of black ink-stained nodes is performed under direct visualization at surgery and is combined with sentinel node (SLN) mapping procedures.

METHODS

Women with newly diagnosed breast cancer who underwent fine or core-needle biopsy of suspicious ALNs were recruited. The nodal cortex and perinodal soft tissue was injected with 0.1-1.0 ml of Spot™ (GI Supply) black ink under ultrasound guidance. Intraoperatively, black stained nodes were removed along with SLNs, noting concordance between the two.

RESULTS

Sixty-six evaluable patients were enrolled (2013-2017). Nineteen received surgery first (Group 1) and 47 neoadjuvant therapy (NAT, Group 2). The average number of nodes tattooed was 1.16 for Group 1 and 1.04 for Group 2. The average interval from tattoo to surgery was 21 days (range 1-62) for Group 1 and 148 days (range 71-257) for Group 2. The tattooed node(s) were visually identified at surgery and corresponded to the sentinel lymph node(s) in 98.5% of cases (18/19 in Group 1 and 47/47 in Group 2). Of the 14 patients in Group 2 whose nodes remained positive following NAT, the tattooed node was the SLN associated with carcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Tattooing is an alternative method for marking biopsied ALNs. Tattooed nodes coincided with SLNs in 98.5% of cases. This technique is advantageous, because it allows for fewer procedures and lower costs compared with other methods.

Breast Cancer Prognostic Factors in the Digital Era: Comparison of Nottingham Grade using Whole Slide Images and Glass Slides

Background:

To assess reproducibility and accuracy of overall Nottingham grade and component scores using digital whole slide images (WSIs) compared to glass slides.

Methods:

Two hundred and eight pathologists were randomized to independently interpret 1 of 4 breast biopsy sets using either glass slides or digital WSI. Each set included 5 or 6 invasive carcinomas (22 total invasive cases). Participants interpreted the same biopsy set approximately 9 months later following a second randomization to WSI or glass slides. Nottingham grade, including component scores, was assessed on each interpretation, providing 2045 independent interpretations of grade. Overall grade and component scores were compared between pathologists (interobserver agreement) and for interpretations by the same pathologist (intraobserver agreement). Grade assessments were compared when the format (WSI vs. glass slides) changed or was the same for the two interpretations.

Results:

Nottingham grade intraobserver agreement was highest using glass slides for both interpretations (73%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 68%, 78%) and slightly lower but not statistically different using digital WSI for both interpretations (68%, 95% CI: 61%, 75%; P= 0.22). The agreement was lowest when the format changed between interpretations (63%, 95% CI: 59%, 68%). Interobserver agreement was significantly higher (P < 0.001) using glass slides versus digital WSI (68%, 95% CI: 66%, 70% versus 60%, 95% CI: 57%, 62%, respectively). Nuclear pleomorphism scores had the lowest inter- and intra-observer agreement. Mitotic scores were higher on glass slides in inter- and intra-observer comparisons.

Conclusions:

Pathologists’ intraobserver agreement (reproducibility) is similar for Nottingham grade using glass slides or WSI. However, slightly lower agreement between pathologists suggests that verification of grade using digital WSI may be more challenging.

Abstract P3-10-12: ERBB2 copy number analysis of invasive breast carcinoma using digital droplet PCR and targeted next-generation sequencing: A focus on 'non-classical' HER2 FISH groups using the 2018 ASCO/CAP HER2 testing guideline

Background: Non-classical HER2 FISH results were recently reclassified in the 2018 HER2 guidelines update, and concurrent IHC testing was recommended as part of additional workup to determine the final HER2 status in these groups. In this study, we explored the genomic landscape of HER2 FISH groups using digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) and targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) on invasive breast carcinomas.

Methods: Fifty-one clinical samples with HER2 FISH and IHC results were included in our analysis and classified into FISH groups based on the updated 2018 ASCO/CAP HER2 testing guideline: (i) Group 1A with ratio ≥2 and signals/cell ≥6, (ii) Group 1B with ratio ≥2 and signals/cell ≥4 and &lt;6, (iii) Group 2 with ratio ≥2 and signals/cell &lt;4, (iv) Group 3 with ratio &lt;2 and signals/cell ≥6, (v) Group 4 with ratio &lt;2 and signals/cell ≥4 and &lt;6, and (vi) Group 5 with ratio &lt;2 and signals/cell &lt;4. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples were analyzed using two ddPCR assays each targeting an exon in the ERBB2 tyrosine kinase domain (exon 19 and 21, respectively) and a 130-gene NGS-based assay. For ddPCR, ERBB2 amplification status was determined from ddPCR ratios by using a recently published algorithm (Otsuji et al. 2017). For targeted NGS, ERBB2 amplification was called when copy number gains were detected in the majority of exons in ERBB2 (&gt;50% of exons).

Results: Mean ddPCR ratios varied amongst the different FISH groups (P &lt; 0.0001). As expected, patients with Group 1A had the highest mean ddPCR ratios compared to those with other FISH findings (P &lt; 0.0001). Furthermore, there was a correlation between ERBB2 ddPCR ratios and HER2 FISH ratios (ρe19 = 0.4435, P = 0.001 and ρe21 = 0.4644, P = 0.0006). Using ddPCR, ERBB2 amplifications were detected in all classically amplified Group 1A cases (5/5) and in none of the classically non-amplified Group 5 cases (0/12). Interestingly, ddPCR assays called ERBB2 amplification in four cases with non-classical results: one in Group 2 (1/6), two in Group 3 (2/6), and one in Group 4 (1/17), including two cases in Groups 3 and 4 which also showed concomitant HER2 overexpression by IHC (3+). Similarly, targeted NGS revealed ERBB2 amplification in all Group 1A cases (5/5) and in none of the Group 5 cases (0/12). Furthermore, NGS detected amplification in three non-classical cases: one in Group 1B (1/5), one in Group 3 (1/6), and one in Group 4 (1/17), including one case in Group 1B which was not called amplified by ddPCR. Notably, the three cases with amplification by NGS were the only three cases in the non-classical groups with HER2 overexpression by IHC. Overall, there was a strong concordance between ERBB2 amplification status by ddPCR/NGS and HER2 overexpression by IHC (κe19 = 0.79, κe21 = 0.92, κNGS = 1.0).

Conclusion: ERBB2 amplification using ddPCR and NGS is correlated with HER2 overexpression in both classical and non-classical FISH groups, thus providing genomic evidence to support the recent recommendation for concurrent IHC testing in cases with unusual FISH results. Our findings also highlight a potential role of ddPCR and targeted NGS in the workup of challenging HER2 cases.

Citation Format: Yang S-R, Bouhlal Y, De La Vega FM, Ballard M, West RB, Sibley RK, Kuo CJ, Vilborg A, Allison KH. ERBB2 copy number analysis of invasive breast carcinoma using digital droplet PCR and targeted next-generation sequencing: A focus on 'non-classical' HER2 FISH groups using the 2018 ASCO/CAP HER2 testing guideline [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-10-12.

Abstract P5-11-06: Does hormone expression by IHC predict ER pathway activity? An analysis in a metastatic breast cancer patient cohort

Background: Immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining for ER and progesterone (PR) receptors in breast cancer tissue is the current standard for testing for eligibility for hormone targeted therapies. However, these markers are imperfect predictors of response, and ER/PR expression can be heterogeneous, especially in the metastatic setting. Within an adjuvant tamoxifen-treated ER positive patient group functional ER pathway activity was associated with improved patient outcome (Verhaegh et al, Cancer Research 2014). This study investigated how ER/PR staining correlates with ER pathway activity in a cohort of metastatic breast cancers.

Methods: Cases of metastatic breast cancer with variable reported ER expression by IHC were selected from the Stanford Pathology Database. Cases were scored by a breast pathologist for percent cellularity of sample, percent and intensity of ER and PR staining, and a qualitative rating of heterogeneity of staining. Digital slides were annotated for areas of cellularity to perform ER pathway activity analysis. Functional ER pathway activitywas measured in a quantitative manner using a biologically validated method, based on Bayesian computational model inference of functional pathway activity from RT-qPCR measurements of mRNA levels of target genes of the pathway transcription factor, providing an ER Pathway Activity Score (PAS)(Verhaegh et al, Cancer Research 2014).

Results: A total of 64 samples were tested for ER/PR expression as well as for ER pathway analysis. Annotated tumor areas of 57 samples were used for measurement of ER PAS. 61.4% were ER expression high (defined as &gt;50% ER IHC positive, mean 94.0%) and 38.6 % were ER low (defined as &lt;50% ER IHC positive, mean 23.0%). ER high cases had higher mean ER PAS when compared to ER low cases (ER high, mean PAS 47.6, SD 19.2; versus ER low, mean PAS 19.4, SD 11.7; unpaired one-tailed 2-sample t-test p&lt;0.001). Importantly, there was wide variation in ER PAS even in cases with high ER expression levels. PR levels did not correlate with ER PAS. Three cases had clustered areas with different ER expression levels within the tissue slide (heterogeneous cases), resulting in 7 separately analyzed areas; ER pathway activity was separately analyzed in these areas. ER PAS was remarkably similar across areas with variable ER staining, e.g. within one tissue slide, areas with 20% and 90% ER expression had nearly the same ER PAS.

Discussion: Grouping cases into high vs low ER IHC staining reveals expected differences in ER PAS. However, nuclear ER expression (IHC) levels may be an imperfect predictor of actual ER pathway activity on an individual case basis. Preliminary results on cases with regional heterogeneity for levels of ER IHC expression suggest that ER PAS is more homogenous than IHC levels. Clinical studies examining value of ER PAS to predict response to hormonal therapies are ongoing.

Citation Format: Yang S-R, van de Stolpe A, van Brussel A, van Ooijen H, Galimzianova A, Cohn DM, Beca F, Rubin DL, Allison KH. Does hormone expression by IHC predict ER pathway activity? An analysis in a metastatic breast cancer patient cohort [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-11-06.

Abstract P2-07-07: Development of a machine learning-based classifier for Oncotype DX® category prediction in a population of lymph node positive breast carcinoma patients

INTRODUCTION: Oncotype DX® (ODX) Assay is a valuable prognostic and predictive tool in ER+, Her2- invasive breast cancer (IBC). Initially tested and validated in lymph node (LN) negative patients, the indications of this test have been expanded to include patients with limited LN-positive disease. Several prediction systems have been developed to predict the ODX Recurrence Score (RS) with substantial performance in predicting a high vs low RS score but with low performance when predicting the 3 classes that compose the standard ODX. Additionally, many of these prediction systems have not been developed and/or tested for a population of LN+ patients.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of several previously published ODX RS predictive systems in a population of LN+ patients. Furthermore, we developed a machine-learning based classification system to accurately predict the ODX 3 category RS for this specific population.

METHODS: We conducted a retrospective search of Stanford's pathology database for all patients with LN+ IBC diagnosed between January 2013 and December 2017 with an ODX RS available. A total of 119 patients were identified for inclusion in this cohort. Our multivariate pathologic feature-based discriminatory model aimed to classify each case as belonging to the low, intermediate or high ODX RS category. We performed model validation by the 10-fold cross validation (10F-CV) method. The model's performance was assessed by comparing simple accuracy, balanced accuracy, F1 score (harmonic average of the precision and recall) and several concordance classification metrics.

RESULTS: Of the evaluated methods, Magee equations performed well in this population of LN+ patients with the modified Magee equation 2 displaying the best accuracy (70.9%) which was surprisingly better than originally reported (55.8%, in Klein et al. Mod Path. 2013). After an initial screen of methods and tuning of the best performing model, our model achieved an overall accuracy of 78.1% on 10F-CV with a 79.1 % balanced accuracy and no two-step discordances. This corresponded to an increase of weighted Cohen's kappa of 30% versus the best performing Magee equation in this cohort and an increase of 103% versus the modified Magee 1 equation (which uses the same features as our model except for tumor grade).

DISCUSSION: Classifiers aimed at providing an alternative to Oncotype DX testing are available and perform consistently across datasets. We are currently validating our approach in a population of 1000 LN-negative patients from the MSKCC and the SEER database. Due to the substantial performance of our machine learning-based classifier based on standard reported pathologic features, our model may be considered an alternative to the ODX standard testing or a screening method for ODX testing, especially for cases with where the cost and availability of the ODX test are a concern.

Citation Format: Beca F, Yang S-R, Gruber JG, Barry-Holson K, West R, Wen HY, Allison KH. Development of a machine learning-based classifier for Oncotype DX® category prediction in a population of lymph node positive breast carcinoma patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-07-07.

Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Testing in Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Clinical Practice Guideline Focused Update

PURPOSE.—

To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing in breast cancer guideline.

METHODS.—

Based on the signals approach, an Expert Panel reviewed published literature and research survey results on the observed frequency of less common in situ hybridization (ISH) patterns to update the recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS.—

Two recommendations addressed via correspondence in 2015 are included. First, immunohistochemistry (IHC) 2+ is defined as invasive breast cancer with weak to moderate complete membrane staining observed in >10% of tumor cells. Second, if the initial HER2 test result in a core needle biopsy specimen of a primary breast cancer is negative, a new HER2 test may (not "must") be ordered on the excision specimen based on specific clinical criteria. The HER2 testing algorithm for breast cancer is updated to address the recommended workup for less common clinical scenarios (approximately 5% of cases) observed when using a dual-probe ISH assay. These scenarios are described as ISH group 2 ( HER2/chromosome enumeration probe 17 [CEP17] ratio ≥2.0; average HER2 copy number <4.0 signals per cell), ISH group 3 ( HER2/CEP17 ratio <2.0; average HER2 copy number ≥6.0 signals per cell), and ISH group 4 ( HER2/CEP17 ratio <2.0; average HER2 copy number ≥4.0 and <6.0 signals per cell). The diagnostic approach includes more rigorous interpretation criteria for ISH and requires concomitant IHC review for dual-probe ISH groups 2 to 4 to arrive at the most accurate HER2 status designation (positive or negative) based on combined interpretation of the ISH and IHC assays. The Expert Panel recommends that laboratories using single-probe ISH assays include concomitant IHC review as part of the interpretation of all single-probe ISH assay results.

Ancillary Prognostic and Predictive Testing in Breast Cancer: Focus on Discordant, Unusual, and Borderline Results

Ancillary testing in breast cancer has become standard of care to determine what therapies may be most effective for individual patients with breast cancer. Single-marker tests are required on all newly diagnosed and newly metastatic breast cancers. Markers of proliferation are also used, and include both single-marker tests like Ki67 as well as panel-based gene expression tests, which have made more recent contributions to prognostic and predictive testing in breast cancers. This review focuses on pathologist interpretation of these ancillary test results, with a focus on expected versus unexpected results and troubleshooting borderline, unusual, or discordant results.

Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Testing in Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Clinical Practice Guideline Focused Update

Purpose To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing in breast cancer guideline. Methods Based on the signals approach, an Expert Panel reviewed published literature and research survey results on the observed frequency of less common in situ hybridization (ISH) patterns to update the recommendations. Recommendations Two recommendations addressed via correspondence in 2015 are included. First, immunohistochemistry (IHC) 2+ is defined as invasive breast cancer with weak to moderate complete membrane staining observed in > 10% of tumor cells. Second, if the initial HER2 test result in a core needle biopsy specimen of a primary breast cancer is negative, a new HER2 test may (not "must") be ordered on the excision specimen based on specific clinical criteria. The HER2 testing algorithm for breast cancer is updated to address the recommended work-up for less common clinical scenarios (approximately 5% of cases) observed when using a dual-probe ISH assay. These scenarios are described as ISH group 2 ( HER2/chromosome enumeration probe 17 [CEP17] ratio ≥ 2.0; average HER2 copy number < 4.0 signals per cell), ISH group 3 ( HER2/CEP17 ratio < 2.0; average HER2 copy number ≥ 6.0 signals per cell), and ISH group 4 ( HER2/CEP17 ratio < 2.0; average HER2 copy number ≥ 4.0 and < 6.0 signals per cell). The diagnostic approach includes more rigorous interpretation criteria for ISH and requires concomitant IHC review for dual-probe ISH groups 2 to 4 to arrive at the most accurate HER2 status designation (positive or negative) based on combined interpretation of the ISH and IHC assays. The Expert Panel recommends that laboratories using single-probe ISH assays include concomitant IHC review as part of the interpretation of all single-probe ISH assay results. Find additional information at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

Assessing Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Solid Tumors: A Practical Review for Pathologists and Proposal for a Standardized Method from the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarkers Working Group: Part 2: TILs in Melanoma, Gastrointestinal Tract Carcinomas, Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma and Mesothelioma, Endometrial and Ovarian Carcinomas, Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck, Genitourinary Carcinomas, and Primary Brain Tumors

Assessment of the immune response to tumors is growing in importance as the prognostic implications of this response are increasingly recognized, and as immunotherapies are evaluated and implemented in different tumor types. However, many different approaches can be used to assess and describe the immune response, which limits efforts at implementation as a routine clinical biomarker. In part 1 of this review, we have proposed a standardized methodology to assess tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in solid tumors, based on the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarkers Working Group guidelines for invasive breast carcinoma. In part 2 of this review, we discuss the available evidence for the prognostic and predictive value of TILs in common solid tumors, including carcinomas of the lung, gastrointestinal tract, genitourinary system, gynecologic system, and head and neck, as well as primary brain tumors, mesothelioma and melanoma. The particularities and different emphases in TIL assessment in different tumor types are discussed. The standardized methodology we propose can be adapted to different tumor types and may be used as a standard against which other approaches can be compared. Standardization of TIL assessment will help clinicians, researchers and pathologists to conclusively evaluate the utility of this simple biomarker in the current era of immunotherapy.

Second opinion strategies in breast pathology: a decision analysis addressing over-treatment, under-treatment, and care costs

PURPOSE

To estimate the potential near-term population impact of alternative second opinion breast biopsy pathology interpretation strategies.

METHODS

Decision analysis examining 12-month outcomes of breast biopsy for nine breast pathology interpretation strategies in the U.S. health system. Diagnoses of 115 practicing pathologists in the Breast Pathology Study were compared to reference-standard-consensus diagnoses with and without second opinions. Interpretation strategies were defined by whether a second opinion was sought universally or selectively (e.g., 2nd opinion if invasive). Main outcomes were the expected proportion of concordant breast biopsy diagnoses, the proportion involving over- or under-interpretation, and cost of care in U.S. dollars within one-year of biopsy.

RESULTS

Without a second opinion, 92.2% of biopsies received a concordant diagnosis. Concordance rates increased under all second opinion strategies, and the rate was highest (95.1%) and under-treatment lowest (2.6%) when all biopsies had second opinions. However, over-treatment was lowest when second opinions were sought selectively for initial diagnoses of invasive cancer, DCIS, or atypia (1.8 vs. 4.7% with no 2nd opinions). This strategy also had the lowest projected 12-month care costs ($5.907 billion vs. $6.049 billion with no 2nd opinions).

CONCLUSIONS

Second opinion strategies could lower overall care costs while reducing both over- and under-treatment. The most accurate cost-saving strategy required second opinions for initial diagnoses of invasive cancer, DCIS, or atypia.

Assessing Tumor-infiltrating Lymphocytes in Solid Tumors: A Practical Review for Pathologists and Proposal for a Standardized Method From the International Immunooncology Biomarkers Working Group: Part 1: Assessing the Host Immune Response, TILs in Invasive Breast Carcinoma and Ductal Carcinoma In Situ, Metastatic Tumor Deposits and Areas for Further Research

Assessment of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in histopathologic specimens can provide important prognostic information in diverse solid tumor types, and may also be of value in predicting response to treatments. However, implementation as a routine clinical biomarker has not yet been achieved. As successful use of immune checkpoint inhibitors and other forms of immunotherapy become a clinical reality, the need for widely applicable, accessible, and reliable immunooncology biomarkers is clear. In part 1 of this review we briefly discuss the host immune response to tumors and different approaches to TIL assessment. We propose a standardized methodology to assess TILs in solid tumors on hematoxylin and eosin sections, in both primary and metastatic settings, based on the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group guidelines for TIL assessment in invasive breast carcinoma. A review of the literature regarding the value of TIL assessment in different solid tumor types follows in part 2. The method we propose is reproducible, affordable, easily applied, and has demonstrated prognostic and predictive significance in invasive breast carcinoma. This standardized methodology may be used as a reference against which other methods are compared, and should be evaluated for clinical validity and utility. Standardization of TIL assessment will help to improve consistency and reproducibility in this field, enrich both the quality and quantity of comparable evidence, and help to thoroughly evaluate the utility of TILs assessment in this era of immunotherapy.

Regional Variability in Percentage of Breast Cancers Reported as Positive for HER2 in California: Implications of Patient Demographics on Laboratory Benchmarks

OBJECTIVES

The expected regional variability in percent human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancers is not currently clear.

METHODS

Data from the 2006 to 2011 California Cancer Registry were examined by county and health service area. The influence of demographic and pathologic features was used in a multivariable logistic regression model to compare expected with observed HER2-positive percentages by region.

RESULTS

There was significant geographic variation by California counties (11.6%-26%). The reported HER2-positive percentage was higher when the population had higher stage, tumor size, grade, percent estrogen receptor negative, younger age, or lower socioeconomic status. Ethnic distribution of the population also influenced HER2-positive percentages. Using a multivariable logistic regression model, most regions had expected values based on their population characteristics; however, "outlier" regions were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

These results deepen our understanding of population characteristics' influence on the distribution of HER2-positive breast cancers. Taking these factors into account can be useful when setting laboratory benchmarks and assessing test quality.

Topical Imiquimod Plus Nab-paclitaxel for Breast Cancer Cutaneous Metastases: A Phase 2 Clinical Trial

Importance

Salvage chemotherapy for recurrent chest wall lesions in breast cancer results in response rates of 20% to 30%. Preclinical studies showed significant disease regression could be induced in murine chest wall mammary cancers with a topical toll-like receptor (TLR)-7 agonist, imiquimod.

Objective

To evaluate the safety and objective response rate (ORR) of imiquimod in combination with systemic albumin bound paclitaxel in treatment-refractory breast cancer of the chest wall.

Design, Setting, and Particpants

A single arm phase 2 clinical trial of 15 patients with breast cancer previously treated in an academic medical center setting between 2009 and 2012 for chest wall disease that had recurred.

Interventions

Imiquimod cream, 5%, was applied topically to a designated target lesion once per day for 4 consecutive days on days 1 through 4, 8 through 11, 15 through 18, and 22 through 25 of a 28-day cycle, for 12 weeks. Albumin bound paclitaxel, 100 mg/m2, was given intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15, and repeated every 28 days over the 12-week period.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary endpoint was safety and ORR. Secondary endpoints included the generation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and modulation of immune cell populations.

Results

The median age at baseline of the 15 study participants was 54 years (range, 46-92 years). Fourteen patients were evaluable. Combination therapy was associated with low-grade toxic effects. Of 358 adverse events 330 (92%) were grades 1 and 2. Five (36%) patients achieved a compete response and another 5 (36%) were partial responders for an overall response rate of 72% (10 of 14). The response duration was limited. Pretreatment levels of programmed death-1 (PD-1)+ peripheral blood T cells (PD-1+ cluster of differentiation [CD]4+; 95% CI, 2.68-6.63; P < .001 and PD-1+CD8+; 95% CI, 1.13-8.35; P = .01) and monocytic myeloid derived suppressor cells (mMDSC) (95% CI, 3.62-12.74; P = .001) greater than controls predicted suboptimal clinical response.

Conclusions and Relevance

Chemoimmunomodulation with a TLR-7 agonist and albumin bound paclitaxel is effective in inducing disease regression in treatment-refractory breast cancer chest wall metastases but responses are short-lived. Preexisting levels of cells indicating either T-cell exhaustion or systemic immunosuppression may be markers of selection for responsive patients.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00821964.

The diagnostic challenge of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic agreement among pathologists is 84% for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Studies of interpretive variation according to grade are limited.

METHODS

A national sample of 115 pathologists interpreted 240 breast pathology test set cases in the Breast Pathology Study and their interpretations were compared to expert consensus interpretations. We assessed agreement of pathologists' interpretations with a consensus reference diagnosis of DCIS dichotomised into low- and high-grade lesions. Generalised estimating equations were used in logistic regression models of rates of under- and over-interpretation of DCIS by grade.

RESULTS

We evaluated 2097 independent interpretations of DCIS (512 low-grade DCIS and 1585 high-grade DCIS). Agreement with reference diagnoses was 46% (95% confidence interval [CI] 42-51) for low-grade DCIS and 83% (95% CI 81-86) for high-grade DCIS. The proportion of reference low-grade DCIS interpretations over-interpreted by pathologists (i.e. categorised as either high-grade DCIS or invasive cancer) was 23% (95% CI 19-28); 30% (95% CI 26-34) were interpreted as a lower diagnostic category (atypia or benign proliferative). Reference high-grade DCIS was under-interpreted in 14% (95% CI 12-16) of observations and only over-interpreted 3% (95% CI 2-4).

CONCLUSION

Grade is a major factor when examining pathologists' variability in diagnosing DCIS, with much lower agreement for low-grade DCIS cases compared to high-grade. These findings support the hypothesis that low-grade DCIS poses a greater interpretive challenge than high-grade DCIS, which should be considered when developing DCIS management strategies.

Surgical implications and variability in the use of the flat epithelial atypia diagnosis on breast biopsy specimens

OBJECTIVES

Flat epithelial atypia (FEA) is a relatively new diagnostic term with uncertain clinical significance for surgical management. Any implied risk of invasive breast cancer associated with FEA is contingent upon diagnostic reproducibility, yet little is known regarding its use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Pathologists in the Breast Pathology Study interpreted one of four 60-case test sets, one slide per case, constructed from 240 breast biopsy specimens. An electronic data form with standardized diagnostic categories was used; participants were instructed to indicate all diagnoses present. We assessed participants' use of FEA as a diagnostic term within: 1) each test set; 2) 72 cases classified by reference as benign without FEA; and 3) six cases classified by reference as FEA. 115 pathologists participated, providing 6900 total independent assessments.

RESULTS

Notation of FEA ranged from 0% to 35% of the cases interpreted, with most pathologists noting FEA on 4 or more test cases. At least one participant noted FEA in 34 of the 72 benign non-FEA cases. For the 6 reference FEA cases, participant agreement with the case reference FEA diagnosis ranged from 17% to 52%; diagnoses noted by participating pathologists for these FEA cases included columnar cell hyperplasia, usual ductal hyperplasia, atypical lobular hyperplasia, and atypical ductal hyperplasia.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed wide variation in the diagnosis of FEA among U.S. pathologists. This suggests that perceptions of diagnostic criteria and any implied risk associated with FEA may also vary. Surgical excision following a core biopsy diagnosis of FEA should be reconsidered and studied further.

Characteristics associated with requests by pathologists for second opinions on breast biopsies

AIMS

Second opinions in pathology improve patient safety by reducing diagnostic errors, leading to more appropriate clinical treatment decisions. Little objective data are available regarding the factors triggering a request for second opinion despite second opinion consultations being part of the diagnostic system of pathology. Therefore we sought to assess breast biopsy cases and interpreting pathologists characteristics associated with second opinion requests.

METHODS

Collected pathologist surveys and their interpretations of 60 test set cases were used to explore the relationships between case characteristics, pathologist characteristics and case perceptions, and requests for second opinions. Data were evaluated by logistic regression and generalised estimating equations.

RESULTS

115 pathologists provided 6900 assessments; pathologists requested second opinions on 70% (4827/6900) of their assessments 36% (1731/4827) of these would not have been required by policy. All associations between case characteristics and requesting second opinions were statistically significant, including diagnostic category, breast density, biopsy type, and number of diagnoses noted per case. Exclusive of institutional policies, pathologists wanted second opinions most frequently for atypia (66%) and least frequently for invasive cancer (20%). Second opinion rates were higher when the pathologist had lower assessment confidence, in cases with higher perceived difficulty, and cases with borderline diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

Pathologists request second opinions for challenging cases, particularly those with atypia, high breast density, core needle biopsies, or many co-existing diagnoses. Further studies should evaluate whether the case characteristics identified in this study could be used as clinical criteria to prompt system-level strategies for mandating second opinions.

A Randomized Study Comparing Digital Imaging to Traditional Glass Slide Microscopy for Breast Biopsy and Cancer Diagnosis

Background:

Digital whole slide imaging may be useful for obtaining second opinions and is used in many countries. However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requires verification studies.

Methods:

Pathologists were randomized to interpret one of four sets of breast biopsy cases during two phases, separated by ≥9 months, using glass slides or digital format (sixty cases per set, one slide per case, n = 240 cases). Accuracy was assessed by comparing interpretations to a consensus reference standard. Intraobserver reproducibility was assessed by comparing the agreement of interpretations on the same cases between two phases. Estimated probabilities of confirmation by a reference panel (i.e., predictive values) were obtained by incorporating data on the population prevalence of diagnoses.

Results:

Sixty-five percent of responding pathologists were eligible, and 252 consented to randomization; 208 completed Phase I (115 glass, 93 digital); and 172 completed Phase II (86 glass, 86 digital). Accuracy was slightly higher using glass compared to digital format and varied by category: invasive carcinoma, 96% versus 93% (P = 0.04); ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 84% versus 79% (P < 0.01); atypia, 48% versus 43% (P = 0.08); and benign without atypia, 87% versus 82% (P < 0.01). There was a small decrease in intraobserver agreement when the format changed compared to when glass slides were used in both phases (P = 0.08). Predictive values for confirmation by a reference panel using glass versus digital were: invasive carcinoma, 98% and 97% (not significant [NS]); DCIS, 70% and 57% (P = 0.007); atypia, 38% and 28% (P = 0.002); and benign without atypia, 97% and 96% (NS).

Conclusions:

In this large randomized study, digital format interpretations were similar to glass slide interpretations of benign and invasive cancer cases. However, cases in the middle of the spectrum, where more inherent variability exists, may be more problematic in digital format. Future studies evaluating the effect these findings exert on clinical practice and patient outcomes are required.

Abstract P3-01-03: Milky Way sign: A potential predictive sign of breast cancer on digital breast tomosynthesis

Purpose: “Milky Way sign (MWS)”, which we recently reported1), is a new finding on digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) showing microcalcifications overlying non-calcified band-like density. Our study purpose was to describe frequencies of and imaging findings associated with MWS, and to examine the predictive value of MWS for breast cancer.

Materials and Methods: We reviewed all stereotactic core biopsies of suspicious calcifications at our institution from 1/1/2015 to 12/31/2015, finding 124 lesions with calcifications, including 20 malignancies (2 IDC, 5 IDC+DCIS, 13 DCIS) and 104 non-malignant lesions (23 high-risk [14 ADH, 6 LCIS/ALH, 1 intraductal papilloma, 2 other atypical], 81 benign), in 116 patients undergoing both 2D mammogram and DBT before biopsies. 2 radiologists reviewed images for the presence of MWS, local breast density within 1 cm surrounding the calcifications, classifying BI-RADS calcification morphology and distribution. We assessed the predictive value of MWS for malignancy using Chi square test and multivariate logistic analysis.

Results: MWS was identified more frequently with DBT (27/124, 22%) than with 2D (13/124, 10%), and more in locally less dense tissue than in locally dense tissue. The calcifications in MWS were fine pleomorphic (13/27, 48%), amorphous (8/27, 30%), fine linear/branching (5/27, 19%), or other (1/27, 4%), with distributions of grouped (20/27, 74%), linear (5/27, 19%) or segmental (2/27, 7%) categories. MWS on DBT was observed in 60% (12/20, including 2 IDC, 2 IDC+DCIS, 8 DCIS) of malignant lesions and 14% (15/104) of benign lesions (table1), and was significantly and positively associated with malignant lesions (p &lt; .001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated the MWS on DBT (p &lt; .001) and fine linear/branching calcifications (p &lt; .001) were independent predictors for malignancy.

Frequencies of MWS on DBT according to histopathology nMWS positiveMWS negativeMalignancy2012 (60)8 (40)-IDC22 (100)0 (0)-IDC+DCIS52 (40)3 (60)-DCIS138 (62)5 (38)Non-malignant lesion10415 (14)89 (86)-ADH143 (21)11 (79)-LCIS/ALH60 (0)6 (100)-Intraductal papilloma10 (0)1 (100)-Other high-risk20 (0)2 (100)-Benign8112 (15)69 (85)Total12427 (22)97 (78)Data are shown as number with percentage in parenthesis.

Conclusions: Although sample size was limited, our results indicate that DBT may contribute in detecting MWS, and that MWS may be a predictive sign for breast cancers, leading to biopsy of suspicious calcifications.

Reference 1) Xu Y, Miyake KK, Liu YI, Downey JR, Lipson J, Allison K, Ikeda DM. “The Milky Way Sign: a new diagnostic findings of ductal carcinoma on digital tomosynthesis.” The Breast Journal. 2016 May; 22 (3):349-51.

Citation Format: Miyake KK, Lipson JA, Allison KH, Xu Y, Liu YI, Downey JR, Ikeda DM. Milky Way sign: A potential predictive sign of breast cancer on digital breast tomosynthesis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-01-03.

'Non-classical' HER2 FISH results in breast cancer: a multi-institutional study

The 2013 CAP/ASCO HER2 Testing Guidelines Update modified HER2 FISH categories such that some cases with 'monosomy', 'co-amplification/polysomy', low-level increased HER2 signals or clustered heterogeneity now are considered amplified or equivocal. This study examines the frequency and clinico-pathologic characteristics of breast cancers with equivocal or 'non-classical' HER2 FISH results. Breast cancers (2001-2014) with HER2 FISH results, HER2 immunohistochemistry, ER, grade, and age from three institutions (Stanford, UCSF, UWMC) were collected. HER2 FISH was interpreted using the updated recommendations. Amplified cases with non-classical results were grouped into the following categories: (1) 'monosomy' (ratio ≥2.0, mean HER2/cell<4.0); (2) 'co-amplified' (ratio<2.0, mean HER2/cell ≥6.0); (3) 'low amplified' (ratio ≥2.0, mean HER2/cell 4.0-5.9). Heterogeneous cases with clustered HER2-positive cells were also included. Of 8068 cases, 5.2% were equivocal and 4.6% had a 'non-classical' HER2 amplified result; 1.4% 'monosomy', 0.8% 'co-amplified', 2.1% 'low amplified', and 0.3% clustered heterogeneity. These cancers had a high frequency of ER positive (80.4%), Nottingham grade 3 (52.1%) results. The highest percentage of grade 3 cancers (66.7%) and positive HER2 immunohistochemistry (31.7%) was in the 'co-amplified' group. The 'monosomy' group had the highest percent grade 1 cancers (13.3%) and was most frequently HER2 immunohistochemistry negative (30.1%). Equivocal cases had very similar characteristics to the 'low-amplified' category. Cases with non-classical HER2 amplification or equivocal results are typically ER positive, higher grade cancers. 'Co-amplified' cases have the highest frequencies of aggressive characteristics and 'monosomy' cases the highest frequencies of lower risk features. With little clinical outcomes data currently available on these non-classical HER2 results, these results support the current classification scheme for HER2 FISH, with case-by-case correlation with additional clinical-pathologic factors when evaluating whether to offer HER2-targeted therapies in these non-classical cases.

The molecular basis of breast cancer pathological phenotypes

The histopathological evaluation of morphological features in breast tumours provides prognostic information to guide therapy. Adjunct molecular analyses provide further diagnostic, prognostic and predictive information. However, there is limited knowledge of the molecular basis of morphological phenotypes in invasive breast cancer. This study integrated genomic, transcriptomic and protein data to provide a comprehensive molecular profiling of morphological features in breast cancer. Fifteen pathologists assessed 850 invasive breast cancer cases from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Morphological features were significantly associated with genomic alteration, DNA methylation subtype, PAM50 and microRNA subtypes, proliferation scores, gene expression and/or reverse-phase protein assay subtype. Marked nuclear pleomorphism, necrosis, inflammation and a high mitotic count were associated with the basal-like subtype, and had a similar molecular basis. Omics-based signatures were constructed to predict morphological features. The association of morphology transcriptome signatures with overall survival in oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive and ER-negative breast cancer was first assessed by use of the Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium (METABRIC) dataset; signatures that remained prognostic in the METABRIC multivariate analysis were further evaluated in five additional datasets. The transcriptomic signature of poorly differentiated epithelial tubules was prognostic in ER-positive breast cancer. No signature was prognostic in ER-negative breast cancer. This study provided new insights into the molecular basis of breast cancer morphological phenotypes. The integration of morphological with molecular data has the potential to refine breast cancer classification, predict response to therapy, enhance our understanding of breast cancer biology, and improve clinical management. This work is publicly accessible at www.dx.ai/tcga_breast. Copyright © 2016 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Diagnostic Reproducibility: What Happens When the Same Pathologist Interprets the Same Breast Biopsy Specimen at Two Points in Time?

BACKGROUND

Surgeons may receive a different diagnosis when a breast biopsy is interpreted by a second pathologist. The extent to which diagnostic agreement by the same pathologist varies at two time points is unknown.

METHODS

Pathologists from eight U.S. states independently interpreted 60 breast specimens, one glass slide per case, on two occasions separated by ≥9 months. Reproducibility was assessed by comparing interpretations between the two time points; associations between reproducibility (intraobserver agreement rates); and characteristics of pathologists and cases were determined and also compared with interobserver agreement of baseline interpretations.

RESULTS

Sixty-five percent of invited, responding pathologists were eligible and consented; 49 interpreted glass slides in both study phases, resulting in 2940 interpretations. Intraobserver agreement rates between the two phases were 92% [95% confidence interval (CI) 88-95] for invasive breast cancer, 84% (95% CI 81-87) for ductal carcinoma-in-situ, 53% (95% CI 47-59) for atypia, and 84% (95% CI 81-86) for benign without atypia. When comparing all study participants' case interpretations at baseline, interobserver agreement rates were 89% (95% CI 84-92) for invasive cancer, 79% (95% CI 76-81) for ductal carcinoma-in-situ, 43% (95% CI 41-45) for atypia, and 77% (95% CI 74-79) for benign without atypia.

CONCLUSIONS

Interpretive agreement between two time points by the same individual pathologist was low for atypia and was similar to observed rates of agreement for atypia between different pathologists. Physicians and patients should be aware of the diagnostic challenges associated with a breast biopsy diagnosis of atypia when considering treatment and surveillance decisions.

Histological features associated with diagnostic agreement in atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast: illustrative cases from the B-Path study

AIMS

This study examined the case-specific characteristics associated with interobserver diagnostic agreement in atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) of the breast.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Seventy-two test set cases with a consensus diagnosis of ADH from the B-Path study were evaluated. Cases were scored for 17 histological features, which were then correlated with the participant agreement with the consensus ADH diagnosis. Participating pathologists' perceptions of case difficulty, borderline features or whether they would obtain a second opinion were also examined for associations with agreement. Of the 2070 participant interpretations of the 72 consensus ADH cases, 48% were scored by participants as difficult and 45% as borderline between two diagnoses; the presence of both of these features was significantly associated with increased agreement (P < 0.001). A second opinion would have been obtained in 80% of interpretations, and this was associated with increased agreement (P < 0.001). Diagnostic agreement ranged from 10% to 89% on a case-by-case basis. Cases with papillary lesions, cribriform architecture and obvious cytological monotony were associated with higher agreement. Lower agreement rates were associated with solid or micropapillary architecture, borderline cytological monotony, or cases without a diagnostic area that was obvious on low power.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that pathologists frequently recognize the challenge of ADH cases, with some cases being more prone to diagnostic variability. In addition, there are specific histological features associated with diagnostic agreement on ADH cases. Multiple example images from cases in this test set are provided to serve as educational illustrations of these challenges.

Pupil diameter changes reflect difficulty and diagnostic accuracy during medical image interpretation

Background

No automated methods exist to objectively monitor and evaluate the diagnostic process while physicians review computerized medical images. The present study tested whether using eye tracking to monitor tonic and phasic pupil dynamics may prove valuable in tracking interpretive difficulty and predicting diagnostic accuracy.

Methods

Pathologists interpreted digitized breast biopsies varying in diagnosis and rated difficulty, while pupil diameter was monitored. Tonic diameter was recorded during the entire duration of interpretation, and phasic diameter was examined when the eyes fixated on a pre-determined diagnostic region during inspection.

Results

Tonic pupil diameter was higher with increasing rated difficulty levels of cases. Phasic diameter was interactively influenced by case difficulty and the eventual agreement with consensus diagnosis. More difficult cases produced increases in pupil diameter, but only when the pathologists’ diagnoses were ultimately correct. All results were robust after adjusting for the potential impact of screen brightness on pupil diameter.

Conclusions

Results contribute new understandings of the diagnostic process, theoretical positions regarding locus coeruleus-norepinephrine system function, and suggest novel approaches to monitoring, evaluating, and guiding medical image interpretation.