Evaluation of reliability of FISH versus brightfield dual-probe in situ hybridization (BDISH) for frontline assessment of HER2 status in breast cancer samples in a community setting

Schiavon, Beatriz N., Jasani, Bharat, de Brot, Louise, Vassallo, José, Damascena, Aline, Cirullo-Neto, Julio, Ivanildo Neves, José, Augusto Soares, Fernando, Gobbi, Helenice and Malagoli Rocha, Rafael 2012. Evaluation of reliability of FISH versus brightfield dual-probe in situ hybridization (BDISH) for frontline assessment of HER2 status in breast cancer samples in a community setting. The American Journal of Surgical Pathology 36 (10) , pp. 1489-1496. 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182635987

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Aims: To evaluate the reliability of novel brightfield microscopy–based dual in situ hybridization (BDISH) methods for frontline HER2 status analysis in selected suboptimally preserved breast cancer tissue samples reflecting of the worst scenario in a community. Methods and Results: A total of 320 morphologically poorly preserved breast invasive ductal carcinomas from the archives of 2 tertiary institutions in Brazil were selected for a tissue microarray–based analysis. 4B5 antibody was used for immunohistochemistry. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), DuoCISH, ZytoDot CISH, and silver in situ hybridization (SISH) were performed and compared. The highest agreement was observed between SISH and FISH. In addition, SISH was easier to assess in both amplified and nonamplified cases when compared with the other chromogenic methods, due to the sharpness of its dots. DuoCISH produced false-positive results, associated with thicker ill-defined dots, causing poor distinction between nonamplification and low amplification. ZytoDot CISH showed lower sensitivity, with increased frequency of false-positive results. Conclusions: SISH is the most reliable of the BDISH methods, with sensitivity and specificity highly comparable with FISH. It is also less deleterious than other BDISH methods, producing signals that were more distinct and therefore more readily analyzable even in poorly preserved tissue.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Medicine
Subjects:	R Medicine > R Medicine (General) R Medicine > RC Internal medicine > RC0254 Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology (including Cancer)
Publisher:	Lippincott Williams and Wilkins
ISSN:	0147-5185
Last Modified:	18 Mar 2023 02:07
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/42704

Citation Data

Cited 18 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item