Estrogen- and Progesterone-Receptor Status in ECOG 2197: Comparison of Immunohistochemistry by Local and Central Laboratories and Quantitative Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction by Central Laboratory

Badve, Sunil; Baehner, Frederick L.; Gray, Robert P.; Childs, Barrett H.; Maddala, Tara; Liu, Mei Lan; Rowley, Steve; Shak, Steven; Pérez, E. González; Shulman, Lawrence J.; Martino, Silvana; Davidson, Nancy E.; Sledge, George W.; Goldstein, Lori J.; Sparano, Joseph A.

doi:10.1200/jco.2007.13.6424

Cited by 214 publications

(174 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

145

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…When individual datasets were used as ''training'' set similar accuracies were obtained in the resulting validation sets (Supplementary Figure 11). Our observed accuracy of ER (91.6%, Table 2) was higher than that between local and central IHC in a recent study from the ECOG 2,197 trial (90%) [51]. In the same study the PgR sensitivity and specificity between local and central IHC were 80.7 and 88.6%, respectively.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 57%

Data driven derivation of cutoffs from a pool of 3,030 Affymetrix arrays to stratify distinct clinical types of breast cancer

Karn

Metzler

Ruckhäberle

et al. 2009

Breast Cancer Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 57%

Data driven derivation of cutoffs from a pool of 3,030 Affymetrix arrays to stratify distinct clinical types of breast cancer

Karn

Metzler

Ruckhäberle

et al. 2009

Breast Cancer Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, both fractionated ER and PR in the present study were shown to display a bimodal distribution, with substantial proportions at F scores of 0 (ER: 30.8%; PR: 29.8%) and 5 (ER: 46.6%; PR: 39.4%) ( Table 1). The distribution was consistent with several previous studies of ER and PR expression measured by immunohistochemical assay (Collins et al, 2005;Nadji et al, 2005;Stendahl et al, 2006;Badve et al, 2008;Viale et al, 2008). Despite the bimodal distribution of ER and PR expression, the present study clearly demonstrates that fractionated ER and PR scores predict a patient's prognosis more accurately than a dichotomized assessment.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Fractionated evaluation of immunohistochemical hormone receptor expression enhances prognostic prediction in breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy

Lin

Lien

et al. 2010

J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Objective: To compare the prognostic prediction between dichotomized and fractionated evaluations of hormone receptor expressions. Methods: Patients with stages I-III breast cancers, who received adjuvant tamoxifen, were enrolled. The expression of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) was evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC). A fractionated score (F score), the percentage of positive-staining nuclei (0=none, 1=1%-10%, 2=11%-30%, 3=31%-50%, 4=51%-70%, and 5=71%-100%), was assigned to each case. The dichotomized scoring method defines an F score >1 as positive. The prognostic values of both scores were compared by multiple Cox's proportional hazard models of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Four hundred and sixteen patients with a median follow-up of 78.0 months were included. F scores for ER and PR correlated directly with DFS and OS. Although both the dichotomized and fractionated ER and PR scores were significantly associated with DFS and OS in univariate analyses, only fractionated ER and PR scores remained as independent prognostic factors of DFS and OS in the final multiple Cox's proportional hazard models. Conclusion: Fractionated IHC hormone receptor expression evaluation enhances the prognostic prediction compared with a dichotomized assessment.

show abstract

“…However, in regards to PR, immunohistochemistry PR-negative cases that were RT-PCR positive were less common than immunohistochemistry PR-positive cases that were RT-PCR negative (similar to our study). The reasons for the difference between Badve et al study and our study include immunohistochemistry analysis on very small samples (ie tissue microarray), and possibly using less optimally fixed tissue and less sensitive antibodies by Badve et al 23 In our study, initial immunohistochemistry was performed on core biopsies, whereas resection specimens were used for the RT-PCR assay. Studies suggest high concordance between qualitative ER expression in core biopsies versus resection specimens.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Semi-quantitative immunohistochemical assay versus oncotype DX® qRT-PCR assay for estrogen and progesterone receptors: an independent quality assurance study

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estrogen receptor (ER) status is a strong predictor of response to hormonal therapy in breast cancer patients. Presence of ER and level of expression have been shown to correlate with time to recurrence in patients undergoing therapy with tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors. Risk reduction is also known to occur in ERnegative, progesterone receptor (PR)-positive patients treated with hormonal therapy. Since the 1990s, immunohistochemistry has been the primary method for assessing hormone receptor status. Recently, as a component of its oncotype DX s assay, Genomic Health began reporting quantitative estrogen and PR results determined by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). As part of an ongoing quality assurance program at our institution, we reviewed 464 breast cancer cases evaluated by both immunohistochemistry and oncotype DX s assay for estrogen and PR. We found good correlation for ER status between both assays (98.9% concordance), with immunohistochemistry being slightly more sensitive. Concordance for PR was 94.2% between immunohistochemistry and qRT-PCR with immunohistochemistry again more sensitive than RT-PCR. The results also showed linear correlation between immunohistochemistry H-scores and qRT-PCR expression values for ER (correlation coefficient of 0.579), and PR (correlation coefficient of 0.685). Due to the higher sensitivity of hormone receptor immunohistochemistry and additional advantages (ie preservation of morphology, less expensive, faster, more convenient), we conclude immunohistochemistry is preferable to qRT-PCR for determination of estrogen and PR expression.

show abstract

Estrogen- and Progesterone-Receptor Status in ECOG 2197: Comparison of Immunohistochemistry by Local and Central Laboratories and Quantitative Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction by Central Laboratory

Cited by 214 publications

References 26 publications

Data driven derivation of cutoffs from a pool of 3,030 Affymetrix arrays to stratify distinct clinical types of breast cancer

Data driven derivation of cutoffs from a pool of 3,030 Affymetrix arrays to stratify distinct clinical types of breast cancer

Fractionated evaluation of immunohistochemical hormone receptor expression enhances prognostic prediction in breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy

Semi-quantitative immunohistochemical assay versus oncotype DX® qRT-PCR assay for estrogen and progesterone receptors: an independent quality assurance study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About