This Article Extract Full Text (PDF) Submit a response to this article Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Guideline Summary: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guideline Recommendations for Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor HER2 Testing in Breast Cancer

	Context

Top Context Discussion

Overview
HER2 amplification occurs in approximately 18% to 20% of breast cancers. Overexpression of HER2 is associated with relevant clinical outcomes in patients with invasive breast cancer. HER2 positivity is often incorporated into prognostic decision-making regarding adjuvant systemic therapy. HER2 status is also predictive for relative resistance and response to certain endocrine therapies and chemotherapy drugs. The ASCO/CAP Expert Panel addresses quality assurance measures and recommends specific methodology to improve HER2 testing accuracy. The Panel recommends that HER2 status be determined for all invasive breast cancers.

Methodology
The ASCO/CAP Expert Panel used evidence from January 1987 thru February 2006 to form the evidence base for recommendation consensus. Databases searched included MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, and the Cochrane Collaboration Library. The Panel also reviewed abstracts presented at ASCO and CAP from 2000 to 2005 and the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium from 2003 to 2005. In addition to a broad international comprehensive medical and research specialty representation on the Panel, representatives from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) served as ex-officio panel members. Select external experts reviewed the guideline, and it was approved by ASCO's Board of Directors and CAP's Board of Governors.

	Discussion

Top Context Discussion

 
HER2 Status and Trastuzumab
Trastuzumab, an anti-HER2 therapy, is a humanized monoclonal antibody that improves response rates, time to progression, and survival when used following or combined with chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer. Approved by the US FDA in 1998 for the treatment of metastatic disease, adjuvant trastuzumab has now been shown in five randomized trials to substantially reduce the risk of recurrence (and in some cases the risk of death) in patients with high-risk, early-stage breast cancer that overexpresses HER2. The current recommended schedule for adjuvant trastuzumab at 12 months is associated with US costs ranging from $70,000 to $110,000. Trastuzumab has also been shown in prospective randomized adjuvant trials to correlate with asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction (5% to 15% of patients) and symptomatic congestive heart failure (2% to 4% of patients). Prospective substudies of adjuvant randomized trials demonstrated that as many as 15% to 20% of the HER2 assays performed in the field may be incorrect when the same specimen was re-evaluated in a high-volume, central laboratory. The ASCO/CAP Expert Panel found that HER2 testing inaccuracies, coupled with trastuzumab costs and associated cardiac toxicity, demand accurate HER2 testing.

FDA-Approved Assays and HER2 Testing
Several assays have been used for tissue-based HER2 determination. These assays include immunohistochemistry (IHC), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), bright field in situ hybridization, either as "home brews" (ie, modifications of existing assays or new assays developed by individual pathology laboratories) or commercial assays approved in the United States by the FDA. Certain FISH and IHC tests are the only assays approved by the US FDA. Still, analyses of prospective randomized adjuvant trials of trastuzumab illustrated that testing algorithms for HER2 had not been standardized and were developed somewhat arbitrarily. Therefore, the Panel strongly recommends validation of laboratory assays or modifications, use of standardized operating procedures, and compliance with new testing criteria to be monitored with the use of stringent laboratory accreditation standards and ongoing proficiency testing.

In accordance with the guideline recommendations, CAP-accredited laboratories (or those that meet the accreditation requirements specified in the guideline) that test for HER2 are required to participate in proficiency testing. Oncologists are encouraged to verify the accreditation status of laboratories used to test for HER2 overexpression, as well as confirm standardized reporting elements for IHC and/or FISH when reviewing HER2 test assessments. Table 1 presents standardized reporting elements.

The ASCO/CAP Guideline Recommendations for HER2 Testing in Breast Cancer were developed and written by Antonio C. Wolff, M. Elizabeth H. Hammond, Jared N. Schwartz, Karen L. Hagerty, D. Craig Allred, Richard J. Cote, Mitchell Dowsett, Patrick L. Fitzgibbons, Wedad Hanna, Amy Langer, Lisa M. McShane, Soonmyung Paik, Mark D. Pegram, Edith A. Perez, Michael F. Press, Anthony Rhodes, Catharine Sturgeon, Sheila Taube, Raymond Tubbs, Gail H. Vance, Marc van de Vijver, Thomas M. Wheeler, and Daniel F. Hayes.

It is important to realize that many management questions have not been comprehensively addressed in randomized trials, and guidelines cannot always account for individual variation among patients. A guideline is not intended to supplant physician judgment with respect to particular patients or special clinical situations and cannot be considered inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of other treatments reasonably directed at obtaining the same results. Accordingly, ASCO considers adherence to this guideline to be voluntary, with ultimate determination regarding its application to be made by the physician in light of each patient's individual circumstances. In addition, the guideline describes administration of therapies in clinical practice; it cannot be assumed to apply to interventions performed in the context of clinical trials, given that clinical studies are designed to test innovative and novel therapies in a disease and setting for which better therapy is needed. Because guideline development involves a review and synthesis of the latest literature, a practice guideline also serves to identify important questions for further research and those settings in which investigational therapy should be considered.

 

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				Podcasts: A New Way for Patients to Receive PLWC Information J. Oncol. Pract, January 1, 2007; 3(1): 39 - 39. [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Extract Full Text (PDF) Submit a response to this article Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                            What's this?