An international study comparing conventional versus mRNA level testing (TargetPrint) for ER, PR, and HER2 status of breast cancer

Wesseling, Jelle; Tinterri, Corrado; Sapino, Anna; Zanconati, Fabrizio; Lutke-Holzik, M; Nguyen, Bichlien; Deck, Kenneth B.; Querzoli, Patrizia; Perin, Tiziana; Giardina, C; Seitz, Gerhard; Guinebretière, Jean Marc; Barone, Julie; Dekker, Laura; Snoo, Femke De; Stork‐Sloots, Lisette; Roepman, Paul; Watanabe, Tôru; Cusumano, P.

doi:10.1007/s00428-016-1979-9

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results showed a high concordance between TargetPrint and IHC/FISH for ER (97.5%) and HER2 (97.5%), and moderate concordance for PgR (77.5%). These results are similar to those reported previously, with concordances of approximately 96% for ER and 95% for HER2 [ 13 , 20 ]. Regarding PgR, the concordance for mRNA and IHC analysis has been shown to be approximately 80% in previous studies [ 21 , 22 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…The correlation between the Ki67 and EP and EPclin scores was examined using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Agreement measurements between binary (positive versus negative) TargetPrint mRNA and IHC classifications were based on two-way contingency table analysis and included overall correlation and positive agreement (defined as the number of samples classified positive by both IHC and mRNA divided by the number of positive samples using IHC) [ 13 ]. Statistical analysis was performed with the SPSS statistics 19 software (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of risk classification between EndoPredict and MammaPrint in ER-positive/HER2-negative primary invasive breast cancer

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo compare the concordance in risk classification between the EndoPredict and the MammaPrint scores obtained for the same cancer samples on 40 estrogen-receptor positive/HER2-negative breast carcinomas.MethodsFormalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded invasive breast carcinoma tissues that were previously analyzed with MammaPrint as part of routine care of the patients, and were classified as high-risk (20 patients) and low-risk (20 patients), were selected to be analyzed by the EndoPredict assay, a second generation gene expression test that combines expression of 8 genes (EP score) with two clinicopathological variables (tumor size and nodal status, EPclin score).ResultsThe EP score classified 15 patients as low-risk and 25 patients as high-risk. EPclin re-classified 5 of the 25 EP high-risk patients into low-risk, resulting in a total of 20 high-risk and 20 low-risk tumors. EP score and MammaPrint score were significantly correlated (p = 0.008). Twelve of 20 samples classified as low-risk by MammaPrint were also low-risk by EP score (60%). 17 of 20 MammaPrint high-risk tumors were also high-risk by EP score. The overall concordance between EP score and MammaPrint was 72.5% (κ = 0.45, (95% CI, 0.182 to 0.718)). EPclin score also correlated with MammaPrint results (p = 0.004). Discrepancies between both tests occurred in 10 cases: 5 MammaPrint low-risk patients were classified as EPclin high-risk and 5 high-risk MammaPrint were classified as low-risk by EPclin and overall concordance of 75% (κ = 0.5, (95% CI, 0.232 to 0.768)).ConclusionsThis pilot study demonstrates a limited concordance between MammaPrint and EndoPredict. Differences in results could be explained by the inclusion of different gene sets in each platform, the use of different methodology, and the inclusion of clinicopathological parameters, such as tumor size and nodal status, in the EndoPredict test.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of risk classification between EndoPredict and MammaPrint in ER-positive/HER2-negative primary invasive breast cancer

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In one study assessing mRNA levels by TargetPrint, most breast carcinomas (five of eight cases) with 1-10% ER expression by IHC were negative by RNA analysis. 25 In this study however, there were even more cases (n = 15) with negative IHC ER results that were ER positive by RNA analysis. Similarly, an additional study found a subset of cases interpreted as ER negative by IHC but positive by RNA expression using the GeneChip Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 array.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 51%

Association between low estrogen receptor positive breast cancer and staining performance

Caruana¹,

Wei²,

Martinez-Morilla³

et al. 2020

npj Breast Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estrogen receptor (ER) expression in breast carcinomas, determined by immunohistochemistry, indicates statistically significant benefit to endocrine therapy in patients with tumors expressing ER in ≥1% of tumor cells. Rare cases with low ER expression (1-10%) lead to the dilemma of treating these tumors as ER positive or negative. We hypothesize that low ER positive result from poor staining performance and that we may detect this artefact by assessing the average dynamic range of normal ducts adjacent to low ER positive tumors. Using quantitative tools, we compare the dynamic range of normal background ER expression in patients with low (1-10%) ER tumors to dynamic range of ER expression in normal epithelium from control patient populations, to determine if low ER cases are accompanied by decreased dynamic range. Low ER cases were infrequent (1% of invasive breast carcinomas). Twenty-one cases with low ER staining and two control cohorts, including a tissue microarray (TMA) of 10 benign breast sections and a group of 34 control breast carcinomas (reported as ER negative or >10% ER positive) with normal background epithelium, were digitally scanned. QuPath was utilized to quantify ER staining for each cell as the mean optical density of nuclear DAB staining. The dynamic range of ER expression in normal epithelium surrounding low ER tumors was significantly lower (range 2-240, median 16.5) than that of the benign epithelium in the control tumors (range 3-475, median 30.8; p < 0.001) and benign TMA sections (range 38-212, median 114; p < 0.001) suggesting inconsistent stainer performance.

show abstract

“…In general, good concordance has been reported between the ER status determined by IHC and the ER status ascertained using MapQuant, 39 TargetPrint, 40 and 3 molecular assays, BluePrint, MammaPrint, and TargetPrint. 41 Allott et al 42 also found high concordance for ER status of >10% positivity between IHC and RNA-based intrinsic subtypes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Multimodal Assessment of Estrogen Receptor mRNA Profiles to Quantify Estrogen Pathway Activity in Breast Tumors

Muthukaruppan

Lasham

Woad

et al. 2017

Clinical Breast Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

An international study comparing conventional versus mRNA level testing (TargetPrint) for ER, PR, and HER2 status of breast cancer

Cited by 12 publications

References 47 publications

Comparison of risk classification between EndoPredict and MammaPrint in ER-positive/HER2-negative primary invasive breast cancer

Comparison of risk classification between EndoPredict and MammaPrint in ER-positive/HER2-negative primary invasive breast cancer

Association between low estrogen receptor positive breast cancer and staining performance

Multimodal Assessment of Estrogen Receptor mRNA Profiles to Quantify Estrogen Pathway Activity in Breast Tumors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About