Context.— Guidelines for HER2 testing in breast cancer have changed over time, from the US Food and Drug Administration guideline to the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guidelines published in 2007, 2013, and 2018. Objective.— To investigate the change in assignment of HER2 status in breast cancers with equivocal (2+) immunohistochemistry (IHC) results by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) following implementation of the ASCO/CAP 2018 guideline. Design.— The study included 3556 invasive breast cancers that were HER2 equivocal (2+) by IHC and were submitted to our FISH laboratory after July 2018. Reflex testing (with repeat IHC staining) was performed on certain categories of FISH results known as groups 2, 3, and 4. Concomitant review of IHC and FISH was performed on these reflex cases per 2018 guideline recommendations. The FISH data were analyzed to compare US Food and Drug Administration and ASCO/CAP 2007, 2013, and 2018 interpretations. Results.— Of 3548 invasive breast cancers with complete data available, the percentage agreement for FISH according to different guidelines was highest for ASCO/CAP 2018 versus US Food and Drug Administration (96.5%), followed by ASCO/CAP 2018 versus 2007 (93.8%), and lowest with ASCO/CAP 2018 versus 2013 (83.7%). Per the 2018 guideline, reflex IHC testing was performed on 633 breast cancers (17.8%); the majority of reflex testing results were negative (541 of 633; 85.5%). The overall distribution of HER2 FISH results (per the 2018 guideline) was 88.5% negative and 11.5% positive. Conclusions.— By eliminating the equivocal FISH category, the 2018 ASCO/CAP guideline significantly reduced the HER2 FISH–positive rate in tumors with equivocal (2+) IHC results.

No abstract

Objectives We investigated the impact of our laboratory’s reflex testing process for resolving ERBB2 (HER2) status on breast cancer samples that require additional workup after fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), per guideline recommendations published in 2018 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the College of American Pathologists (CAP). Methods In total, 500 breast cancer specimens with ERBB2 FISH results in groups 2 through 4 (all reported as immunohistochemistry [IHC] equivocal [2+] at external laboratories) were resubmitted for IHC testing in our laboratory. Per the ASCO/CAP guideline, FISH was rescored when internal IHC was also equivocal (2+), targeted to tumor areas demonstrating more intense IHC staining, if observed. Results Reflex IHC/FISH testing changed the final reported ERBB2 status in 185 of 500 (37.0%) samples. Result changes included discordant IHC (n = 4 score 0, n = 132 score 1+, and n = 16 score 3+) and discordant FISH (n = 33). Numerical differences in FISH scores were comparable for targeted vs nontargeted FISH rescoring (P = .086 for ERBB2 copy number; P = .49 for ERBB2 ratio). Two cases showed larger differences in FISH scores, suggesting heterogeneity. Conclusions Retesting of breast cancer samples with equivocal IHC frequently changes IHC results, but targeted reanalysis of borderline FISH results rarely identifies significant differences in ERBB2 copy number or ratio.