HER2 Status Assessment in Endometrial Serous Carcinoma: Comparative Analysis of Two Proposed Testing and Interpretation Algorithms

Abstract

HER2 status is now routinely assessed in endometrial serous carcinoma (ESC) due to the reported predictive value of HER2 protein overexpression and/or gene amplification. Herein the authors compare 2 proposed testing and interpretation guidelines for HER2 in ESC. Forty-three consecutive cases of ESC that had been dually tested by both HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) were interpreted using 2 sets of guidelines. Guideline set 1 (GS1) is the 2018 American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guidelines for breast cancer. Guideline set 2 (GS2) is a recent proposal that is a slight modification of the enrollment criteria for the clinical trial (NCT01367002) that demonstrated a survival benefit for anti-HER2 therapy in ESC. By IHC, GS1 and GS2, respectively classified 39.5% (17/43) and 28% (12/43) of ESC as HER2-negative, 37.2% (16/43) and 53.4% (23/43) as HER2 equivocal, and 23.2% (10/43) and 18.6% (8/43) as HER2-positive (P > 0.05 for all). IHC and FISH were highly concordant at the extremes using either set of guidelines, as no cases were found to be IHC3+/FISH-negative or IHC 0-1+/FISH-positive. GS1 and GS2 were comparable regarding the proportion of IHC equivocal cases that were HER2 amplified by FISH (19% vs 23% respectively; [P = 0.71]). GS1 and GS2 displayed 98% (42/43) concordance regarding the final (IHC and/or FISH-based) classification of tumors as being HER2-positive or negative, and the same 13 cases were ultimately classified as HER2 amplified using either GS1 or GS2. One “discordant” case was classified as HER2-positive using GS2 but HER2-negative using GS1 (HER2 IHC score 2+ using both guidelines, HER2:CEP17 signal ratio of 3, HER2 signal number of 3.4). Six (14%) of the 43 cases (FISH Groups: 2, 3, and 4) would require IHC results to interpret the FISH findings using GS1. Because GS1 requires that the HER2 IHC staining be observed within a homogeneous and contiguous invasive cell population, and this is not a requirement in GS2, GS2 may be better suited for ESC given its frequently heterogeneous staining pattern. Additional studies may be required on the optimal interpretation of problematic dual-probe FISH scenarios in GS2 and the necessity for IHC correlation in such scenarios. Using either set of guidelines, our findings support a reflex testing strategy of restricting FISH testing to cases that are IHC equivocal.