Giuseppe Viale

American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guideline Recommendations for Immunohistochemical Testing of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptors in Breast Cancer

PURPOSE To develop a guideline to improve the accuracy of immunohistochemical (IHC) estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer and the utility of these receptors as predictive markers. METHODS The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists convened an international Expert Panel that conducted a systematic review and evaluation of the literature in partnership with Cancer Care Ontario and developed recommendations for optimal IHC ER/PgR testing performance. RESULTS Up to 20% of current IHC determinations of ER and PgR testing worldwide may be inaccurate (false negative or false positive). Most of the issues with testing have occurred because of variation in preanalytic variables, thresholds for positivity, and interpretation criteria. RECOMMENDATIONS The Panel recommends that ER and PgR status be determined on all invasive breast cancers and breast cancer recurrences. A testing algorithm that relies on accurate, reproducible assay performance is proposed. Elements to reliably reduce assay variation are specified. It is recommended that ER and PgR assays be considered positive if there are at least 1% positive tumor nuclei in the sample on testing in the presence of expected reactivity of internal (normal epithelial elements) and external controls. The absence of benefit from endocrine therapy for women with ER-negative invasive breast cancers has been confirmed in large overviews of randomized clinical trials.

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.

PURPOSE To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing in breast cancer to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing and its utility as a predictive marker in invasive breast cancer. METHODS ASCO/CAP convened an Update Committee that included coauthors of the 2007 guideline to conduct a systematic literature review and update recommendations for optimal HER2 testing. RESULTS The Update Committee identified criteria and areas requiring clarification to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing by immunohistochemistry (IHC) or in situ hybridization (ISH). The guideline was reviewed and approved by both organizations. RECOMMENDATIONS The Update Committee recommends that HER2 status (HER2 negative or positive) be determined in all patients with invasive (early stage or recurrence) breast cancer on the basis of one or more HER2 test results (negative, equivocal, or positive). Testing criteria define HER2-positive status when (on observing within an area of tumor that amounts to > 10% of contiguous and homogeneous tumor cells) there is evidence of protein overexpression (IHC) or gene amplification (HER2 copy number or HER2/CEP17 ratio by ISH based on counting at least 20 cells within the area). If results are equivocal (revised criteria), reflex testing should be performed using an alternative assay (IHC or ISH). Repeat testing should be considered if results seem discordant with other histopathologic findings. Laboratories should demonstrate high concordance with a validated HER2 test on a sufficiently large and representative set of specimens. Testing must be performed in a laboratory accredited by CAP or another accrediting entity. The Update Committee urges providers and health systems to cooperate to ensure the highest quality testing. This guideline was developed through a collaboration between the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists and has been published jointly by invitation and consent in both Journal of Clinical Oncology and the Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine.

Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013

The 13th St Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference (2013) Expert Panel reviewed and endorsed substantial new evidence on aspects of the local and regional therapies for early breast cancer, supporting less extensive surgery to the axilla and shorter durations of radiation therapy. It refined its earlier approach to the classification and management of luminal disease in the absence of amplification or overexpression of the Human Epidermal growth factor Receptor 2 (HER2) oncogene, while retaining essentially unchanged recommendations for the systemic adjuvant therapy of HER2-positive and ‘triple-negative’ disease. The Panel again accepted that conventional clinico-pathological factors provided a surrogate subtype classification, while noting that in those areas of the world where multi-gene molecular assays are readily available many clinicians prefer to base chemotherapy decisions for patients with luminal disease on these genomic results rather than the surrogate subtype definitions. Several multi-gene molecular assays were recognized as providing accurate and reproducible prognostic information, and in some cases prediction of response to chemotherapy. Cost and availability preclude their application in many environments at the present time. Broad treatment recommendations are presented. Such recommendations do not imply that each Panel member agrees: indeed, among more than 100 questions, only one (trastuzumab duration) commanded 100% agreement. The various recommendations in fact carried differing degrees of support, as reflected in the nuanced wording of the text below and in the votes recorded in supplementary Appendix S1, available at Annals of Oncology online. Detailed decisions on treatment will as always involve clinical consideration of disease extent, host factors, patient preferences and social and economic constraints.

Assessment of Ki67 in Breast Cancer: Recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group

Uncontrolled proliferation is a hallmark of cancer. In breast cancer, immunohistochemical assessment of the proportion of cells staining for the nuclear antigen Ki67 has become the most widely used method for comparing proliferation between tumor samples. Potential uses include prognosis, prediction of relative responsiveness or resistance to chemotherapy or endocrine therapy, estimation of residual risk in patients on standard therapy and as a dynamic biomarker of treatment efficacy in samples taken before, during, and after neoadjuvant therapy, particularly neoadjuvant endocrine therapy. Increasingly, Ki67 is measured in these scenarios for clinical research, including as a primary efficacy endpoint for clinical trials, and sometimes for clinical management. At present, the enormous variation in analytical practice markedly limits the value of Ki67 in each of these contexts. On March 12, 2010, an international panel of investigators with substantial expertise in the assessment of Ki67 and in the development of biomarker guidelines was convened in London by the co-chairs of the Breast International Group and North American Breast Cancer Group Biomarker Working Party to consider evidence for potential applications. Comprehensive recommendations on preanalytical and analytical assessment, and interpretation and scoring of Ki67 were formulated based on current evidence. These recommendations are geared toward achieving a harmonized methodology, create greater between-laboratory and between-study comparability, and allow earlier valid applications of this marker in clinical practice.

Strong Time Dependence of the 76-Gene Prognostic Signature for Node-Negative Breast Cancer Patients in the TRANSBIG Multicenter Independent Validation Series

Purpose: Recently, a 76-gene prognostic signature able to predict distant metastases in lymph node–negative (N−) breast cancer patients was reported. The aims of this study conducted by TRANSBIG were to independently validate these results and to compare the outcome with clinical risk assessment. Experimental Design: Gene expression profiling of frozen samples from 198 N− systemically untreated patients was done at the Bordet Institute, blinded to clinical data and independent of Veridex. Genomic risk was defined by Veridex, blinded to clinical data. Survival analyses, done by an independent statistician, were done with the genomic risk and adjusted for the clinical risk, defined by Adjuvant! Online. Results: The actual 5- and 10-year time to distant metastasis were 98% (88-100%) and 94% (83-98%), respectively, for the good profile group and 76% (68-82%) and 73% (65-79%), respectively, for the poor profile group. The actual 5- and 10-year overall survival were 98% (88-100%) and 87% (73-94%), respectively, for the good profile group and 84% (77-89%) and 72% (63-78%), respectively, for the poor profile group. We observed a strong time dependence of this signature, leading to an adjusted hazard ratio of 13.58 (1.85-99.63) and 8.20 (1.10-60.90) at 5 years and 5.11 (1.57-16.67) and 2.55 (1.07-6.10) at 10 years for time to distant metastasis and overall survival, respectively. Conclusion: This independent validation confirmed the performance of the 76-gene signature and adds to the growing evidence that gene expression signatures are of clinical relevance, especially for identifying patients at high risk of early distant metastases.

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

PURPOSE To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing in breast cancer to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing and its utility as a predictive marker in invasive breast cancer. METHODS ASCO/CAP convened an Update Committee that included coauthors of the 2007 guideline to conduct a systematic literature review and update recommendations for optimal HER2 testing. RESULTS The Update Committee identified criteria and areas requiring clarification to improve the accuracy of HER2 testing by immunohistochemistry (IHC) or in situ hybridization (ISH). The guideline was reviewed and approved by both organizations. RECOMMENDATIONS The Update Committee recommends that HER2 status (HER2 negative or positive) be determined in all patients with invasive (early stage or recurrence) breast cancer on the basis of one or more HER2 test results (negative, equivocal, or positive). Testing criteria define HER2-positive status when (on observing within an area of tumor that amounts to >10% of contiguous and homogeneous tumor cells) there is evidence of protein overexpression (IHC) or gene amplification (HER2 copy number or HER2/CEP17 ratio by ISH based on counting at least 20 cells within the area). If results are equivocal (revised criteria), reflex testing should be performed using an alternative assay (IHC or ISH). Repeat testing should be considered if results seem discordant with other histopathologic findings. Laboratories should demonstrate high concordance with a validated HER2 test on a sufficiently large and representative set of specimens. Testing must be performed in a laboratory accredited by CAP or another accrediting entity. The Update Committee urges providers and health systems to cooperate to ensure the highest quality testing.

Quantification of Angiogenesis in Solid Human Tumours: an International Consensus on the Methodology and Criteria of Evaluation

‘Angiogenesis Group, Department of Oncology, Antwerp University Hospital, Wilrijkstraat 10, B-2650 Edegem, Belgium; *Department of Oncology, St. Bortolo Hospital, Vicenza, Italy; ‘ICRF Molecular Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, U.K.; “Department of Surgery, Tokyo Metropolitan Komagome Hospital, Tokyo, Japan; ‘Department of Surgery, University of Liverpool, Liverpool; 6Department of Histopathology, University College London, London, U.K.; ‘Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, European Institute of Oncology, University of Milano, Milan, Italy; and ‘Department of Pathology, University of California, San Francisco, California, U.S.A.

Biological and Molecular Heterogeneity of Breast Cancers Correlates with Their Cancer Stem Cell Content

Pathways that govern stem cell (SC) function are often subverted in cancer. Here, we report the isolation to near purity of human normal mammary SCs (hNMSCs), from cultured mammospheres, on the basis of their ability to retain the lipophilic dye PKH26 as a consequence of their quiescent nature. PKH26-positive cells possess all the characteristics of hNMSCs. The transcriptional profile of PKH26-positive cells (hNMSC signature) was able to predict biological and molecular features of breast cancers. By using markers of the hNMSC signature, we prospectively isolated SCs from the normal gland and from breast tumors. Poorly differentiated (G3) cancers displayed higher content of prospectively isolated cancer SCs (CSCs) than did well-differentiated (G1) cancers. By comparing G3 and G1 tumors in xenotransplantation experiments, we directly demonstrated that G3s are enriched in CSCs. Our data support the notion that the heterogeneous phenotypical and molecular traits of human breast cancers are a function of their CSC content.

Prognostic and Predictive Value of Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in a Phase III Randomized Adjuvant Breast Cancer Trial in Node-Positive Breast Cancer Comparing the Addition of Docetaxel to Doxorubicin With Doxorubicin-Based Chemotherapy: BIG 02-98

PURPOSE Previous preclinical and clinical data suggest that the immune system influences prognosis and response to chemotherapy (CT); however, clinical relevance has yet to be established in breast cancer (BC). We hypothesized that increased lymphocytic infiltration would be associated with good prognosis and benefit from immunogenic CT-in this case, anthracycline-only CT-in selected BC subtypes. PATIENTS AND METHODS We investigated the relationship between quantity and location of lymphocytic infiltrate at diagnosis with clinical outcome in 2009 node-positive BC samples from the BIG 02-98 adjuvant phase III trial comparing anthracycline-only CT (doxorubicin followed by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil [CMF] or doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by CMF) versus CT combining doxorubicin and docetaxel (doxorubicin plus docetaxel followed by CMF or doxorubicin followed by docetaxel followed by CMF). Readings were independently performed by two pathologists. Disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and interaction with type of CT associations were studied. Median follow-up was 8 years. RESULTS There was no significant prognostic association in the global nor estrogen receptor (ER) -positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -negative population. However, each 10% increase in intratumoral and stromal lymphocytic infiltrations was associated with 17% and 15% reduced risk of relapse (adjusted P = .1 and P = .025), respectively, and 27% and 17% reduced risk of death in ER-negative/HER2-negative BC regardless of CT type (adjusted P = .035 and P = .023), respectively. In HER2-positive BC, there was a significant interaction between increasing stromal lymphocytic infiltration (10% increments) and benefit with anthracycline-only CT (DFS, interaction P = .042; OS, P = .018). CONCLUSION In node-positive, ER-negative/HER2-negative BC, increasing lymphocytic infiltration was associated with excellent prognosis. Further validation of the clinical utility of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in this context is warranted. Our data also support the evaluation of immunotherapeutic approaches in selected BC subtypes.

Axillary dissection versus no axillary dissection in patients with sentinel-node micrometastases (IBCSG 23–01): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND For patients with breast cancer and metastases in the sentinel nodes, axillary dissection has been standard treatment. However, for patients with limited sentinel-node involvement, axillary dissection might be overtreatment. We designed IBCSG trial 23-01 to determine whether no axillary dissection was non-inferior to axillary dissection in patients with one or more micrometastatic (≤2 mm) sentinel nodes and tumour of maximum 5 cm. METHODS In this multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial, patients were eligible if they had clinically non-palpable axillary lymph node(s) and a primary tumour of 5 cm or less and who, after sentinel-node biopsy, had one or more micrometastatic (≤2 mm) sentinel lymph nodes with no extracapsular extension. Patients were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to either undergo axillary dissection or not to undergo axillary dissection. Randomisation was stratified by centre and menopausal status. Treatment assignment was not masked. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. Non-inferiority was defined as a hazard ratio (HR) of less than 1·25 for no axillary dissection versus axillary dissection. The analysis was by intention to treat. Per protocol, disease and survival information continues to be collected yearly. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00072293. FINDINGS Between April 1, 2001, and Feb 28, 2010, 465 patients were randomly assigned to axillary dissection and 469 to no axillary dissection. After the exclusion of three patients, 464 patients were in the axillary dissection group and 467 patients were in the no axillary dissection group. After a median follow-up of 5·0 (IQR 3·6-7·3) years, we recorded 69 disease-free survival events in the axillary dissection group and 55 events in the no axillary dissection group. Breast-cancer-related events were recorded in 48 patients in the axillary dissection group and 47 in the no axillary dissection group (ten local recurrences in the axillary dissection group and eight in the no axillary dissection group; three and nine contralateral breast cancers; one and five [corrected] regional recurrences; and 34 and 25 distant relapses). Other non-breast cancer events were recorded in 21 patients in the axillary dissection group and eight in the no axillary dissection group (20 and six second non-breast malignancies; and one and two deaths not due to a cancer event). 5-year disease-free survival was 87·8% (95% CI 84·4-91·2) in the group without axillary dissection and 84·4% (80·7-88·1) in the group with axillary dissection (log-rank p=0·16; HR for no axillary dissection vs axillary dissection was 0·78, 95% CI 0·55-1·11, non-inferiority p=0·0042). Patients with reported long-term surgical events (grade 3-4) included one sensory neuropathy (grade 3), three lymphoedema (two grade 3 and one grade 4), and three motor neuropathy (grade 3), all in the group that underwent axillary dissection, and one grade 3 motor neuropathy in the group without axillary dissection. One serious adverse event was reported, a postoperative infection in the axilla in the group with axillary dissection. INTERPRETATION Axillary dissection could be avoided in patients with early breast cancer and limited sentinel-node involvement, thus eliminating complications of axillary surgery with no adverse effect on survival. FUNDING None.