Hormone Receptor Antibody Reagents Assessed for Breast Cancer
By LabMedica International staff writers Posted on 08 Aug 2017 |
Image: Breast cancer: immunohistochemical comparison of three estrogen receptor antibodies: A through C, 1D5 and 6F11 show negativity, whereas SP1 shows positivity (Photo courtesy of Stanford University Medical Center).
Immunohistochemical analysis of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) expression in breast cancer is the current standard of care and directly determines therapy.
Estrogen receptor–expressing breast cancers tend to have better prognosis than ER-negative breast cancers and even more importantly, patients with strongly ER-positive tumors derive substantial benefit from therapies inhibiting estrogen signaling.
Scientists at the Stanford University Medical Center (Stanford, CA, USA) compared the performance of different antibody reagents for ER and PgR immunohistochemical analysis by using College of American Pathologists (CAP) proficiency testing data. The team retrospectively analyzed tissue microarrays of ten 2-mm cores per slide and analyzed survey data from 80 ER and 80 PgR cores by antibody clone from more than 1,200 laboratories. The laboratories were instructed to stain the provided slides by using their clinically validated protocols (assuming a negative control is run and is appropriately negative) and score them according to the ASCO/CAP guidelines.
The team found that laboratories used the following ER antibodies: SP1 (72%), 6F11 (17%), 1D5 (3%), and the PgR antibodies 1E2 (61%), 16 (12%), PgR-636 (13%), PgR-1294 (8%) in 2015. While 63 of 80 ER cores (79%) were scored similarly using each of the three antibodies, there were significant differences for others, with SP1 yielding more positive interpretations. Four cores were scored as ER negative by more than half of the laboratories using 1D5 or 6F11, while SP1 produced positive results in more than 70% of laboratories using that antibody. Despite the greater variety of PgR antibody reagents and greater PgR tumor heterogeneity, 61 of 80 cores (76%) were scored similarly across the four PgR antibodies.
The authors concluded that analysis of proficiency testing data provides useful comparative data regarding analytic variables in ER and PgR testing. They highlighted the striking differences in ER results by antibody clone, with SP1 yielding more positive results than either 6F11 or 1D5. Accurate ER and PgR testing in breast cancer is crucial for appropriate treatment. The study was published on July 17, 2017, in the journal Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine.
Related Links:
Stanford University Medical Center
Estrogen receptor–expressing breast cancers tend to have better prognosis than ER-negative breast cancers and even more importantly, patients with strongly ER-positive tumors derive substantial benefit from therapies inhibiting estrogen signaling.
Scientists at the Stanford University Medical Center (Stanford, CA, USA) compared the performance of different antibody reagents for ER and PgR immunohistochemical analysis by using College of American Pathologists (CAP) proficiency testing data. The team retrospectively analyzed tissue microarrays of ten 2-mm cores per slide and analyzed survey data from 80 ER and 80 PgR cores by antibody clone from more than 1,200 laboratories. The laboratories were instructed to stain the provided slides by using their clinically validated protocols (assuming a negative control is run and is appropriately negative) and score them according to the ASCO/CAP guidelines.
The team found that laboratories used the following ER antibodies: SP1 (72%), 6F11 (17%), 1D5 (3%), and the PgR antibodies 1E2 (61%), 16 (12%), PgR-636 (13%), PgR-1294 (8%) in 2015. While 63 of 80 ER cores (79%) were scored similarly using each of the three antibodies, there were significant differences for others, with SP1 yielding more positive interpretations. Four cores were scored as ER negative by more than half of the laboratories using 1D5 or 6F11, while SP1 produced positive results in more than 70% of laboratories using that antibody. Despite the greater variety of PgR antibody reagents and greater PgR tumor heterogeneity, 61 of 80 cores (76%) were scored similarly across the four PgR antibodies.
The authors concluded that analysis of proficiency testing data provides useful comparative data regarding analytic variables in ER and PgR testing. They highlighted the striking differences in ER results by antibody clone, with SP1 yielding more positive results than either 6F11 or 1D5. Accurate ER and PgR testing in breast cancer is crucial for appropriate treatment. The study was published on July 17, 2017, in the journal Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine.
Related Links:
Stanford University Medical Center
Latest Immunology News
- Diagnostic Blood Test for Cellular Rejection after Organ Transplant Could Replace Surgical Biopsies
- AI Tool Precisely Matches Cancer Drugs to Patients Using Information from Each Tumor Cell
- Genetic Testing Combined With Personalized Drug Screening On Tumor Samples to Revolutionize Cancer Treatment
- Testing Method Could Help More Patients Receive Right Cancer Treatment
- Groundbreaking Test Monitors Radiation Therapy Toxicity in Cancer Patients
- State-Of-The Art Techniques to Investigate Immune Response in Deadly Strep A Infections
- Novel Immunoassays Enable Early Diagnosis of Antiphospholipid Syndrome
- New Test Could Predict Immunotherapy Success for Broader Range Of Cancers
- Simple Blood Protein Tests Predict CAR T Outcomes for Lymphoma Patients
- Cell Sorter Chip Technology to Pave Way for Immune Profiling at POC
- Chip Monitors Cancer Cells in Blood Samples to Assess Treatment Effectiveness
- Automated Immunohematology Approaches Can Resolve Transplant Incompatibility
- AI Leverages Tumor Genetics to Predict Patient Response to Chemotherapy
- World’s First Portable, Non-Invasive WBC Monitoring Device to Eliminate Need for Blood Draw
- Predictive T-Cell Test Detects Immune Response to Viruses Even Before Antibodies Form
- Single Blood Draw to Detect Immune Cells Present Months before Flu Infection Can Predict Symptoms