Handan KAYA, İdris ÖNEM, Erkin ARIBAL, Hülya ŞAHİN, Onur BUĞDAYCI, Hande MOLLAMEMİŞOĞLU, Faruk Erdem KOMBAK

Concordance of immunohistochemistry between core needle biopsy and surgical resection of breast cancer

Background/aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the concordance of immunohistochemical (IHC) parameters of breast lesions between the core needle biopsy (CNB) and the surgical resection specimen. Materials and methods: CNB and resection specimens of female patients were retrospectively analyzed. ER, PR, HER-2, and Ki-67 parameters were compared for each patient. A total of 284 cases were assessed. Forty-one and 48 cases were excluded from the HER-2 and Ki-67 examinations, respectively, because the CNBs did not allow for IHC. Results: Concordance rates were 93.3% for ER, 89.4% for PR, 90.1% for HER-2, and 80.9% for Ki-67. Conclusion: CNB is accurate for the evaluation of the surrogate molecular profile of invasive breast cancer despite the heterogeneity of tumors.

PDF

___

1. Lorgis V, Algros MP, Villanueva C, Chaigneau L, ThierryVuillemin A, Nguyen T, Demarchi M, Bazan F, Sautiere JL, Maisonnette-Lescot Y et al. Discordance in early breast cancer for tumour grade, estrogen receptor, progesteron receptors and human epidermal receptor-2 status between core needle biopsy and surgical excisional primary tumour. Breast 2011; 20: 284- 287.
2. OLeary R, Hawkins K, Beazley JC, Lansdown MR, Hanby AM. Agreement between preoperative core needle biopsy and postoperative invasive breast cancer histopathology is not dependent on the amount of clinical material obtained. J Clin Pathol 2004; 57: 193-195.
3. Asogan AB, Hong GS, Arni Prabhakaran SK. Concordance between core needle biopsy and surgical specimen for ER, PgR and Her2neu receptor status in breast cancer and study of difference in reliability between the two groups with the change in ASCO/CAP guidelines. Singapore Med J 2017; 58: 145-149.
4. Burge CN, Chang HR, Apple SK. Do the histologic features and results of breast cancer biomarker studies differ between core biopsy and surgical excision specimens? Breast 2006; 15: 167- 172.
5. Arnedos M, Nerurkar A, Osin P, AHern R, Smith IE, Dowsett M. Discordance between core needle biopsy (CNB) and excisional biopsy (EB) for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR) and HER2 status in early breast cancer (EBC). Ann Oncol 2009; 20: 1948-1952.
6. Park SY, Kim KS, Lee TG, Park SS, Kim SM, Han W, Noh DY, Kim SW. The accuracy of preoperative core biopsy in determining histologic grade, hormone receptors, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status in invasive breast cancer. Am J Surg 2009; 197: 266-269.
7. Giuliani M, Patrolecco F, Rella R, Di Giovanni SE, Infante A, Rinaldi P, Romani M, Mule A, Arciuolo D, Belli P et al. Can breast cancer biopsy influence sentinel lymph node status? Clin Breast Cancer 2016; 16: e153-e157.
8. Nakamura R, Yamamoto N, Shiina N, Miyaki T, Ikebe D, Itami M, Shida T, Miyazaki M. Impact of host and histopathological factors on the discrepancies in estrogen receptor, and progesterone receptor, and HER2 status between core needle biopsy and surgically excised tumors. Breast 2016; 26: 141-147.
9. Cahill RA, Walsh D, Landers RJ, Watson RG. Preoperative profiling of symptomatic breast cancer by diagnostic core biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 2006; 13: 45-51.
10. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG, Dowsett M, McShane LM, Allison KH, Allred DC, Bartlett JM, Bilous M, Fitzgibbons P et al. Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31: 3997-4013.
11. Verkooijen HM; Core Biopsy After Radiological Localisation (COBRA) Study Group. Diagnostic accuracy of stereotactic large-core needle biopsy for nonpalpable breast disease: results of a multicenter prospective study with 95% surgical confirmation. Int J Cancer 2002; 99: 853-859.
12. Lim TH, Lim AS, Thike AA, Tien SL, Tan PH. Implications of the updated 2013 American Society of Clinical Oncology/ College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations on human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 gene testing using immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization for breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2016; 140: 140-147.
13. Overcast WB, Zhang J, Zynger DL, Tozbikian GH. Impact of the 2013 ASCO/CAP HER2 revised guidelines on HER2 results in breast core biopsies with invasive breast carcinoma: a retrospective study. Virchows Arch 2016; 469: 203-212.
14. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Thurlimann B, Senn HJ; Panel Members. Strategies for subtypes--dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Ann Oncol 2011; 22: 1736-1747.
15. Hukkinen K, Kivisaari L, Heikkila PS, Von Smitten K, Leidenius M. Unsuccessful preoperative biopsies, fine needle aspiration cytology or core needle biopsy, lead to increased costs in the diagnostic workup in breast cancer. Acta Oncol 2008; 47: 1037- 1045.
16. Rakha EA, Pigera M, Shin SJ, DAlfonso T, Ellis IO, Lee AH. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in invasive breast cancer: should histological grade, type and oestrogen receptor status influence the decision to repeat testing? Histopathology 2016; 69: 20-24.
17. Dekker TJ, Smit VT, Hooijer GK, Van de Vijver MJ, Mesker WE, Tollenaar RA, Nortier JW, Kroep JR. Reliability of core needle biopsy for determining ER and HER2 status in breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2013; 24: 931-937.
18. Wojnar A, Bartosz Pula B, Podhorska-Okolow M, Dziegiel P. Discrepancies between HER2 assessment from core needle biopsies and surgical specimens of invasive ductal breast carcinoma. Adv Clin Exp Med 2013; 22: 27-31.
19. Wuerstlein R, Sotlar K, Gluz O, Otremba B, von Schumann R, Witzel I, Schindlbeck C, Janni W, Schem C, Bauerfeind I et al. The West German Study Group Breast Cancer Intrinsic Subtype study: a prospective multicenter decision impact study utilizing the Prosigna assay for adjuvant treatment decisionmaking in estrogen-receptor-positive, HER2-negative earlystage breast cancer. Curr Med Res Opin 2016; 32: 1217-1224.
20. Zardavas D, Irrthum A, Swanton C, Piccart M. Clinical management of breast cancer heterogeneity. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2015; 12: 381-394.
21. Knutsvik G, Stefansson IM, Aziz S, Arnes J, Eide J, Collett K, Akslen LA. Evaluation of Ki67 expression across distinct categories of breast cancer specimens: a population-based study of matched surgical specimens, core needle biopsies and tissue microarrays. PLoS One 2014; 9: e112-121.
22. Romero Q, Bendahl PO, Klintman M, Loman N, Ingvar C, Ryden L, Rose C, Grabau D, Borgquist S. Ki67 proliferation in core biopsies versus surgical samples - a model for neo-adjuvant breast cancer studies. BMC Cancer 2011; 11: 341.
23. Chen X, Zhu S, Fei X, Garfield DH, Wu J, Huang O, Li Y, Zhu L, He J, Chen W et al. Surgery time interval and molecular subtype may influence Ki67 change after core needle biopsy in breast cancer patients. BMC Cancer 2015; 15: 822.
24. Neumeister VM, Anagnostou V, Siddiqui S, England AM, Zarrella ER, Vassilakopoulou M, Parisi F, Kluger Y, Hicks DG, Rimm DL. Quantitative assessment of effect of preanalytic cold ischemic time on protein expression in breast cancer tissues. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012; 104: 1815-1824.
25. Focke CM, Decker T, van Diest PJ. Reliability of histological grade in breast cancer core needle biopsies depends on biopsy size: a comparative study with subsequent surgical excisions. Histopathology 2016; 69: 1047-1054.
26. Kalkman S, Bulte JP, Halilovic A, Bult P, van Diest PJ. Brief fixation does not hamper the reliability of Ki67 analysis in breast cancer core-needle biopsies: a double-centre study. Histopathology 2015; 66: 380-387.
27. Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, AHern R, Bartlett J, Coombes RC, Cuzick J, Ellis M, Henry NL, Hugh JC, Lively T et al. Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer working group. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011; 103: 1656-1664.
28. Polley MY, Leung SC, McShane LM, Gao D, Hugh JC, Mastropasqua MG, Viale G, Zabaglo LA, Penault-Llorca F, Bartlett JM et al. An international Ki67 reproducibility study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2013; 105: 1897-1906.
29. Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D, Gao D, Leung S, Snider J, Watson M, Davies S, Bernard PS, Parker JS et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009; 101: 736-750.
30. Prendeville S, Feeley L, Bennett MW, OConnell F, Browne TJ. Reflex repeat HER2 testing of grade 3 breast carcinoma at excision using immunohistochemistry and in situ analysis: frequency of HER2 discordance and utility of core needle biopsy parameters to refine case selection. Am J Clin Pathol 2016; 145: 75-80.