Purpose: Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) are used to determine human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2) status and patient eligibility for trastuzumab therapy. Using FISH and IHC, we analyzed the relationship between pathologic complete response to trastuzumab-based neoadjuvant therapy and level of HER-2 amplification in locally advanced breast cancer.

Experimental Design: Breast biopsies from 93 HER-2–positive patients treated with trastuzumab-based neoadjuvant therapy were centrally collected and analyzed retrospectively for HER-2 amplification using FISH and HER-2 overexpression using IHC. Tumors were classified by FISH as no, low, or high amplification. Biopsies were reassessed centrally by IHC and graded 0, 1+, 2+, or 3+.

Results: HER-2 status of tumor samples as assessed by FISH and IHC correlated: 16 no amplification (11 IHC 1+ and 5 IHC 2+), 27 low amplification (26 IHC 3+ and 1 IHC 2+), and 50 high amplification (all IHC 3+). Trastuzumab-based neoadjuvant therapy achieved pathologic complete response in 35 of 93 (37.6%) tumors. Pathologic complete response rate in low- and high-amplification tumors was significantly higher than in no-amplification tumors (44% versus 6%; P < 0.004). Pathologic complete response rate in high-amplification tumors was significantly higher compared with low-amplification tumors (56% versus 22%; P < 0.005). In the subgroup of low- plus high-amplification tumors, no correlation was found between pathologic complete response rate and IHC score, treatment regimen, T or N stage, tumor grade, or hormonal receptors.

Conclusions: This is the first study to show positive correlation between level of HER-2 amplification assessed by FISH and rate of pathologic complete response to trastuzumab-based neoadjuvant treatment.

The human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2) gene, which plays an important role in tumor formation and growth processes, is amplified in approximately 20% to 30% of all breast cancers (1, 2). Patients whose tumors overexpress HER-2 are more likely to experience a shorter time to relapse and a significantly lower overall survival rate (1, 2). Treatment with trastuzumab (Herceptin), a recombinant monoclonal antibody against HER-2, results in significant clinical benefits in patients diagnosed with HER-2–positive disease. In phase II/III trials, trastuzumab significantly improved survival by up to 8.5 months when given as first-line treatment in combination with a taxane (3, 4) in women with HER-2–positive metastatic breast cancer. In five major adjuvant clinical trials involving >13,000 women with HER-2–positive early breast cancer, trastuzumab significantly reduced the risk of recurrence and improved overall survival by one third (58).

In the neoadjuvant setting, primary systemic therapy with trastuzumab-based combination chemotherapy has also shown clinical benefit in terms of both overall response and pathologic complete response rates (913). The goals of primary systemic therapy are to treat occult systemic disease and decrease tumor size, thus allowing for breast-conserving surgery (14). Primary systemic therapy with trastuzumab may prove particularly beneficial for women with HER-2–positive locally advanced breast cancer and, as such, accurate and efficient HER-2 status testing should be done at the earliest opportunity after diagnosis (10, 15, 16).

Currently, both immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) are the established HER-2 testing methods. IHC detects the amount of HER-2 protein expressed on the surface of cells and relies on a qualitative scoring system from 0 to 3+, with 0 to 1+ being negative for HER-2 overexpression, 2+ being borderline, and 3+ indicating positive HER-2 status. FISH detects amplification of the HER-2 gene and thus tumors are interpreted as HER-2 negative or positive by counting the number of HER-2 gene copies. IHC is relatively simple and cost effective; however, results are reliant on several variables and can be associated with interpretation errors (1719). In the North American clinical trials of adjuvant trastuzumab, a moderately high level of false-positive HER-2 status cases were initially reported in patients tested locally with IHC (20, 21). However, if IHC procedures are standardized and calibrated with FISH, a high degree of concordance between IHC and FISH exists (22, 23). Other studies have also reported relatively good concordance between IHC 3+ and FISH-positive as well as IHC 0/1+ and FISH-negative scores but differences between the two assays for cases surrounding the IHC 2+ score (18, 24, 25). The best way to assess HER-2 status for trastuzumab therapy is still in debate (26).

Trastuzumab-based neoadjuvant studies that enrolled both IHC 2+ and 3+ patients showed that patients who scored IHC 3+ were more responsive to trastuzumab treatment than those who scored IHC 2+ (11, 27). In clinical practice, most IHC 2+ scores are followed by additional FISH testing to determine HER-2 status accurately. As pathologic complete response is often predictive of postsurgical disease-free survival and overall survival, we sought to ascertain whether a relationship between level of HER-2 amplification, as assessed by FISH, and pathologic complete response existed in women diagnosed with HER-2–positive locally advanced breast cancer who were treated preoperatively with a combination of trastuzumab plus chemotherapy.

Patients. Breast biopsies from 93 patients who had received trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy as primary systemic therapy for operable, HER-2–positive, stage II/III breast cancer were collected from 19 centers in France. All patients provided written, informed consent for their tissue material and clinical data to be centrally collected and used for research purposes.

Patients were aged 27 to 67 years and had unilateral, histologically confirmed, T2 or T3, N0-1, nonmetastatic, noninflammatory, HER-2–positive breast cancer requiring mastectomy. Most patients were treated preoperatively in two open-label, phase II clinical trials: TAXHER01 (n = 21) and GETNA01 (n = 61; refs. 11, 13). An additional 11 patients who had been treated with the same preoperative regimen as in the TAXHER01 trial were also included in the analyses.

All patients had received weekly neoadjuvant trastuzumab (4 mg/kg loading dose followed by 2 mg/kg once weekly) in combination with either docetaxel (100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks for six cycles; n = 32) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks for six cycles) plus carboplatin (area under the curve of 6 every 3 weeks for six cycles; n = 61). Three weeks after the last course of trastuzumab-based neoadjuvant treatment, pathologic complete response was assessed according to Chevallier's classification (28); no carcinoma evidence either in the breast or in the lymph nodes, with or without in situ carcinoma, was considered as pathologic complete response.

HER-2 testing. All patients had initially tested IHC 3+ for HER-2 status, as determined by local participating centers. For this study, HER-2 status was analyzed retrospectively and centrally assessed using both IHC and FISH.

Central IHC analyses for HER-2 overexpression were done with A485 polyclonal antibody (dilution 1:1,800) on the BenchMark XT system (Ventana Medical Systems, Inc.). Biopsies were graded according to the HercepTest (DAKO) scoring system (0, 1+, 2+, or 3+). FISH analyses were done using the HER-2 Probe (Oncor) and BenchMark XT system. The pathologist who did FISH analyses was blinded to all other patient data, including the original and central IHC test results. For each tumor, the mean of HER-2 signals was calculated by counting signals in ≥60 tumor cell nuclei. The degree of HER-2 amplification in tumors, as assessed by single-color FISH, was classified as follows: no amplification (mean, <6 signals/nuclei); low amplification (mean, 6-10 signals per nuclei); or high amplification (mean, >10 signals/nuclei or uncountable due to clusters of signals). Several studies have proposed the cutoff value of six copies between no amplification and amplification as appropriate for single-color FISH (2931) and this is the cutoff recommended by the American Society of Cinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists (32). The cutoff of 10 gene copies number per nuclei between low and high amplification is somewhere arbitrary but it was chosen because it is the same are those proposed with chromogenic in situ hybridization (3335). It was also chosen because over this cutoff, due to clusters and small aggregates, signals are almost always not possible to be precisely counted.

Borderline tumors (mean approaching six signals per nuclei) were analyzed by double-color FISH using a HER-2 gene–specific probe and a centromeric probe for chromosome 17 (PathVysion HER-2 DNA Probe kit, Vysis-Abbott) to determine HER-2 amplification. In these cases, HER-2 amplification was defined by a ratio of HER-2 over chromosome 17 centromeric signals of ≥2.2 (32).

The scores obtained by FISH for each tumor were subsequently compared with multiple patient and tumor variables (including treatment regimen, patient age, tumor-node-metastasis staging, and IHC score) and pathologic complete response rates to determine if FISH testing could predict more accurately patient response to neoadjuvant treatment with trastuzumab plus chemotherapy. The subpopulation of patients eligible for trastuzumab treatment (IHC 3+ and/or FISH positive) was also analyzed for variables predictive of pathologic complete response.

Statistics. All analyses were done with Stata software. Univariate analyses were done using Pearson's χ2 or Fisher's exact test with a bilateral 5% type I error. Initial analyses involved the whole studied population. Analyses were then done on the subpopulation of patients eligible for trastuzumab treatment [central IHC 3+ (n = 76) and central IHC 2+ with FISH amplification (n = 1)] to study the prognostic factors of pathologic complete response. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate odds ratios and two-sided 95% confidence intervals. In the model of logistic regression, we included variables with a P < 0.05 in the univariate analysis; treatment and Scarff-Bloom-Richardson grade were also included because of their clinical relevance.

Patients. Baseline patient demographics are summarized in Table 1. All patients had invasive breast cancer, with most patients having T2, N0-1, and grade 2/3 disease. No patients showed evidence of metastatic disease. Mean age was 46 years (range, 27-67 years). According to Chevalier's classification, 35 of 93 (37.6%) patients had a pathologic complete response, whereas 57 of 93 (61.3%) patients experienced pathologic partial or no response.

Table 1.

Baseline patient characteristics

CharacteristicPatients (n = 93), n (%)
Mean age (range), y 46 (27-67) 
Tumor stage  
    T2 66 (71) 
    T3 21 (22.6) 
    T4 5 (5.4) 
    Unknown 1 (1.1) 
Nodal status  
    N0 46 (49.5) 
    N1 43 (46.2) 
    N2 4 (4.3) 
Tumor grade  
    SBR1 3 (3.2) 
    SBR2 44 (47.3) 
    SBR3 41 (44.1) 
    Unknown 5 (5.4) 
Hormone receptor status  
    Positive 51 (54.8) 
    Negative 36 (38.7) 
    Unknown 6 (6.5) 
Treatment  
    TH 32 (34.4) 
    TCH 61 (65.6) 
Pathologic response  
    pCR 35 (37.6) 
    Non-pCR 58 (62.4) 
CharacteristicPatients (n = 93), n (%)
Mean age (range), y 46 (27-67) 
Tumor stage  
    T2 66 (71) 
    T3 21 (22.6) 
    T4 5 (5.4) 
    Unknown 1 (1.1) 
Nodal status  
    N0 46 (49.5) 
    N1 43 (46.2) 
    N2 4 (4.3) 
Tumor grade  
    SBR1 3 (3.2) 
    SBR2 44 (47.3) 
    SBR3 41 (44.1) 
    Unknown 5 (5.4) 
Hormone receptor status  
    Positive 51 (54.8) 
    Negative 36 (38.7) 
    Unknown 6 (6.5) 
Treatment  
    TH 32 (34.4) 
    TCH 61 (65.6) 
Pathologic response  
    pCR 35 (37.6) 
    Non-pCR 58 (62.4) 

Abbreviations: SBR, Scarff-Bloom-Richardson; TH, trastuzumab + docetaxel; TCH, trastuzumab + docetaxel + carboplatin; pCR, complete pathologic response; non-pCR, absence of complete pathologic response.

HER-2 testing: comparison of FISH and IHC results. FISH analysis rated 50 (53.8%) tumors as high amplification, all of which scored 3+ on central IHC review, with >80% of labeled cells in all cases. Of the 27 (29%) tumors categorized as low amplification, 1 (4%) was 2+ on central IHC review and the remaining tumors (96%) were 3+, with >80% of labeled cells in all cases. In this category of low-amplification tumors, the mean signals per tumor nuclei ranged from 6.9 to 9.8, with a mean of 8.6 for the 27 tumors. For two tumors with the lowest mean (6.9 and 7.2), amplification was confirmed by double-color FISH, with the ratio HER-2/chromosome 17 being >2.2.

Sixteen (17.2%) tumors were categorized as no amplification, with 11 (69%) rated 1+ on central IHC review and 5 (31%) rated 2+. Mean signals per tumor nuclei was 2.6 (range, 1.1-5.2) for the 16 tumors in this category. The absence of amplification for the tumor with the highest mean (5.2) was confirmed by double-color FISH, with the ratio HER-2/chromosome 17 being <1.8.

Analysis of tumor characteristics according to FISH results. There were no significant differences between the three groups of FISH amplification (no amplification, low amplification, and high amplification) in terms of treatment given, age, or T or N stage (Table 2). As expected, amplification of the HER-2 gene as assessed by FISH correlated with tumor grade, with significantly more grade 3 tumors displaying high HER-2 amplification [28 of 49 (56%); P = 0.021]. High amplification of HER-2 also correlated with hormone receptor status: a significant number of hormone receptor–negative tumors [27 of 36 (75%)] were classified as high amplification and no hormone receptor–negative tumors were classified as no amplification (P = 0.001).

Table 2.

Patient and tumor characteristics according to HER-2 gene amplification

Patients
P
NA (n = 16), n (%)LA (n = 27), n (%)HA (n = 50), n (%)
Mean age (range), y 46.4 (32-62) 47.6 (29-62) 45.6 (27-67)  
Treatment     
    TCH 11 (69) 18 (67) 32 (64)  
    TH 5 (31) 9 (33) 18 (36) 0.932 
Tumor stage     
    T2 12 (75) 17 (63) 37 (74)  
    T3 3 (19) 7 (26) 11 (22)  
    T4 3 (11) 2 (4) 0.610 
    Unknown 1 (6)  
Nodal status     
    N0 9 (56) 9 (34) 28 (56)  
    N1 or N2 7 (44) 18 (66) 22 (44) 0.138 
Tumor grade     
    SBR1 1 (6.5) 2 (4)  
    SBR2 8 (53.5) 19 (70) 17 (34)  
    SBR3 6 (40.0) 7 (26) 28 (56) 0.021 
    Unknown 1 (6.0) 1 (4) 3 (6)  
Hormone receptor status     
    Positive 13 (81) 16 (59) 22 (44)  
    Negative 9 (33) 27 (54) 0.001 
    Unknown 3 (19) 2 (7) 1 (2)  
Central IHC score     
    1+ 11 (69)  
    2+ 5 (31) 1 (4) <0.0001 
    3+ 26 (96) 50 (100)  
Pathologic response     
    pCR 1 (6) 6 (22) 28 (56)  
    Non-pCR 15 (94) 21 (78) 22 (44) <0.0001 
Patients
P
NA (n = 16), n (%)LA (n = 27), n (%)HA (n = 50), n (%)
Mean age (range), y 46.4 (32-62) 47.6 (29-62) 45.6 (27-67)  
Treatment     
    TCH 11 (69) 18 (67) 32 (64)  
    TH 5 (31) 9 (33) 18 (36) 0.932 
Tumor stage     
    T2 12 (75) 17 (63) 37 (74)  
    T3 3 (19) 7 (26) 11 (22)  
    T4 3 (11) 2 (4) 0.610 
    Unknown 1 (6)  
Nodal status     
    N0 9 (56) 9 (34) 28 (56)  
    N1 or N2 7 (44) 18 (66) 22 (44) 0.138 
Tumor grade     
    SBR1 1 (6.5) 2 (4)  
    SBR2 8 (53.5) 19 (70) 17 (34)  
    SBR3 6 (40.0) 7 (26) 28 (56) 0.021 
    Unknown 1 (6.0) 1 (4) 3 (6)  
Hormone receptor status     
    Positive 13 (81) 16 (59) 22 (44)  
    Negative 9 (33) 27 (54) 0.001 
    Unknown 3 (19) 2 (7) 1 (2)  
Central IHC score     
    1+ 11 (69)  
    2+ 5 (31) 1 (4) <0.0001 
    3+ 26 (96) 50 (100)  
Pathologic response     
    pCR 1 (6) 6 (22) 28 (56)  
    Non-pCR 15 (94) 21 (78) 22 (44) <0.0001 

Abbreviations: NA, no amplification; LA, low amplification; HA, high amplification.

Central IHC testing revealed no HER-2 1+ tumors displaying FISH amplification, 1 of 6 HER-2 2+ tumors displaying low amplification, and all HER-2 3+ tumors displaying low amplification or high amplification (P < 0.0001). Complete pathologic response was significantly related to presence of HER-2 amplification, with pathologic complete response observed in 1 of 16 (6%) no-amplification tumors, 6 of 27 (22%) low-amplification tumors, and 28 of 50 (56%) high-amplification tumors (P < 0.001).

Analysis of variables that can predict pathologic complete response. Tumor characteristics according to pathologic complete response are summarized in Table 3. There was no relationship between pathologic complete response and treatment regimen, patient age, T or N stage, or Scarff-Bloom-Richardson grade. Pathologic complete response was significantly more frequent in FISH-amplified tumors (44%) than in nonamplified tumors (6%; P = 0.004). As expected, pathologic complete response also occurred significantly more frequently in HER-2 3+ tumors (P = 0.009). There was also a trend toward pathologic complete response in hormone receptor–negative tumors (P = 0.051).

Table 3.

Analysis of factors that can predict pathologic complete response

Patients, n (%)
P
pCRNon-pCR
Treatment    
    TCH (n = 61) 22 (36) 39 (64)  
    TH (n = 32) 13 (41) 19 (59) 0.66 
Tumor stage    
    T2 (n = 66) 26 (39) 40 (61)  
    T3 (n = 21) 7 (33) 14 (67)  
    T4 (n = 5) 2 (40) 3 (60) 0.879 
Nodal status    
    N0 (n = 46) 18 (39) 28 (61)  
    N1 or N2 (n = 47) 17 (36) 30 (64) 0.76 
Tumor grade    
    SBR1 (n = 3) 1 (33) 2 (67)  
    SBR2 (n = 44) 12 (27) 32 (73)  
    SBR3 (n = 41) 20 (49) 21 (51) 0.122 
Hormone receptor status    
    Positive (n = 51) 15 (29) 36 (71)  
    Negative (n = 36) 18 (50) 18 (50) 0.051 
IHC score    
    1+ (n = 11) 11 (100)  
    2+ (n = 6) 1 (17) 5 (83)  
    3+ (n = 76) 34 (45) 42 (55) 0.009 
FISH analysis    
    LA + HA (n = 77) 34 (44) 43 (56)  
    NA (n = 16) 1 (6) 15 (94) 0.004 
Patients, n (%)
P
pCRNon-pCR
Treatment    
    TCH (n = 61) 22 (36) 39 (64)  
    TH (n = 32) 13 (41) 19 (59) 0.66 
Tumor stage    
    T2 (n = 66) 26 (39) 40 (61)  
    T3 (n = 21) 7 (33) 14 (67)  
    T4 (n = 5) 2 (40) 3 (60) 0.879 
Nodal status    
    N0 (n = 46) 18 (39) 28 (61)  
    N1 or N2 (n = 47) 17 (36) 30 (64) 0.76 
Tumor grade    
    SBR1 (n = 3) 1 (33) 2 (67)  
    SBR2 (n = 44) 12 (27) 32 (73)  
    SBR3 (n = 41) 20 (49) 21 (51) 0.122 
Hormone receptor status    
    Positive (n = 51) 15 (29) 36 (71)  
    Negative (n = 36) 18 (50) 18 (50) 0.051 
IHC score    
    1+ (n = 11) 11 (100)  
    2+ (n = 6) 1 (17) 5 (83)  
    3+ (n = 76) 34 (45) 42 (55) 0.009 
FISH analysis    
    LA + HA (n = 77) 34 (44) 43 (56)  
    NA (n = 16) 1 (6) 15 (94) 0.004 

Analysis of variables predictive of pathologic complete response in patients eligible for trastuzumab treatment after central HER-2 testing.Table 4 summarizes the analysis of factors that might predict pathologic complete response in the subpopulation of tumors that were IHC 3+ and/or FISH amplified (n = 77) and thus eligible for treatment with trastuzumab. In this population of tumors, the only variable related to pathologic complete response was the level of HER-2 amplification as assessed by FISH, with 28 of 50 (56%) high-amplification tumors showing pathologic complete response compared with 6 of 27 (22%) low-amplification tumors (P = 0.004). Treatment regimen, patient age, T or N stage, Scarff-Bloom-Richardson grade, hormone receptor status, and IHC score were not significantly related to pathologic complete response.

Table 4.

Analysis of factors that can predict pathologic complete response in the population eligible for trastuzumab treatment after centrally confirmed HER-2 status

Patients, n (%)
P
pCRNon-pCR
Treatment    
    TCH (n = 50) 21 (42) 29 (58)  
    TH (n = 27) 13 (48) 14 (52) 0.604 
Tumor stage    
    T2 (n = 54) 25 (54) 29 (46)  
    T3 (n = 18) 7 (39) 11 (61)  
    T4 (n = 5) 2 (40) 3 (60) 0.845 
Nodal status    
    N0 (n = 37) 17 (46) 20 (54)  
    N1 or N2 (n = 40) 17 (42) 23 (58) 0.761 
Tumor grade    
    SBR1 or 2 (n = 38) 13 (34) 25 (66)  
    SBR3 (n = 35) 19 (54) 16 (46) 0.084 
Hormone receptor status    
    Positive (n = 38) 15 (40) 23 (60)  
    Negative (n = 36) 18 (50) 18 (50) 0.363 
IHC central review    
    2+ (n = 1) 1 (100)  
    3+ (n = 76) 34 (44) 42 (56) 0.371 
HER-2 amplification    
    HA (n = 50) 28 (56) 22 (44)  
    LA (n = 27) 6 (22) 21 (78) 0.004 
Patients, n (%)
P
pCRNon-pCR
Treatment    
    TCH (n = 50) 21 (42) 29 (58)  
    TH (n = 27) 13 (48) 14 (52) 0.604 
Tumor stage    
    T2 (n = 54) 25 (54) 29 (46)  
    T3 (n = 18) 7 (39) 11 (61)  
    T4 (n = 5) 2 (40) 3 (60) 0.845 
Nodal status    
    N0 (n = 37) 17 (46) 20 (54)  
    N1 or N2 (n = 40) 17 (42) 23 (58) 0.761 
Tumor grade    
    SBR1 or 2 (n = 38) 13 (34) 25 (66)  
    SBR3 (n = 35) 19 (54) 16 (46) 0.084 
Hormone receptor status    
    Positive (n = 38) 15 (40) 23 (60)  
    Negative (n = 36) 18 (50) 18 (50) 0.363 
IHC central review    
    2+ (n = 1) 1 (100)  
    3+ (n = 76) 34 (44) 42 (56) 0.371 
HER-2 amplification    
    HA (n = 50) 28 (56) 22 (44)  
    LA (n = 27) 6 (22) 21 (78) 0.004 

Multivariate analysis. Results of the multivariate analysis done with logistic regression are summarized in Table 5. In this model, we combined treatment regimen (to exclude treatment effect), tumor grade, and level of HER-2 amplification to determine which variables were related to pathologic complete response. Results show that only level of amplification as assessed by FISH was related to pathologic complete response (P = 0.01).

Table 5.

Multivariate statistical analysis of factors that can predict pathologic complete response in the population of patients eligible for trastuzumab treatment (IHC 2+ or 3+ centrally confirmed with FISH amplification)

No. patients (n = 73)Odds ratio95% confidence intervalP
HER-2 amplification     
    LA 26   
    HA 47 4.75 1.5-15.4 0.01 
Treatment     
    TCH 46   
    TH 27 1.54 0.5-4.6 0.44 
Tumor grade     
    SBR1 or 2 38   
    SBR3 35 1.76   
No. patients (n = 73)Odds ratio95% confidence intervalP
HER-2 amplification     
    LA 26   
    HA 47 4.75 1.5-15.4 0.01 
Treatment     
    TCH 46   
    TH 27 1.54 0.5-4.6 0.44 
Tumor grade     
    SBR1 or 2 38   
    SBR3 35 1.76   

To our knowledge, this is the first study to show a positive correlation between level of HER-2 amplification, as assessed by FISH, and rate of pathologic complete response to trastuzumab-based neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced HER-2–positive breast tumors.

Several phase II studies of trastuzumab plus chemotherapy as primary systemic therapy have shown substantially improved response rates in this population of patients at high risk for relapse, with most overall response rates ≥75% (for detailed review, see ref. 13). However, pathologic complete response rates, which are often considered more indicative of disease-free and overall survival, have been more variable, ranging from 7% in one small scale study (n = 14) of trastuzumab plus docetaxel and epirubicin to >40% in several larger studies (for detailed review, see ref. 13). Thus, any baseline factor that could be used to help in predicting which patients would benefit most from trastuzumab-based neoadjuvant regimens would be invaluable to clinicians.

In our study, the only variable related to pathologic complete response in the subpopulation of patients eligible for treatment with trastuzumab (IHC 2+/3+ and/or FISH positive) was the level of HER-2 amplification as assessed by FISH. Two neoadjuvant studies of trastuzumab plus a taxane, which enrolled both IHC 2+ and 3+ patients, have shown that patients who scored IHC 3+ were more likely to respond to trastuzumab treatment than those patients who scored IHC 2+ for HER-2 overexpression (13, 27). Although all FISH-positive tumors were centrally confirmed as IHC 2+ or 3+ in this study, our classification of HER-2 amplification by FISH was more precise in identifying those patients who would have benefited most from trastuzumab. Indeed, pathologic complete response was seen significantly more frequently in high-amplification FISH tumors compared with low-amplification tumors in patients who were eligible to receive trastuzumab treatment. This degree of subclassification with regard to HER-2 status would not have been possible using IHC. Therefore, FISH may be a more accurate HER-2 testing method to predict pathologic complete response in the neoadjuvant setting.

Interestingly, our results are in line with retrospective analyses done on patients enrolled in the pivotal trials of trastuzumab in HER-2–positive metastatic breast cancer. Whereas patients with IHC scores of 2+ and 3+ were initially eligible for the phase III trials, subset analysis by Slamon et al. (4) revealed that the clinical benefits of trastuzumab plus paclitaxel were greatest in patients whose tumors were graded IHC 3+. Furthermore, retrospective analyses revealed that patients who tested HER-2 positive by FISH experienced significantly better response rates and improved survival with trastuzumab than those patients whose tumors were FISH negative. This suggests that FISH may predict more accurately which patients will obtain the most clinical benefit from trastuzumab therapy in the metastatic setting (36).

Although the number of cases included in this study is not large and despite the size of the confidence intervals, our analysis shows statistically significant differences between the two groups of amplification in term of pCR. These results have certainly to be confirmed in the future in a larger series. Moreover, our results are in concordance with those published recently by Giuliani et al. (37) in metastatic HER-2–positive breast cancer treated with trastuzumab alone or combined with chemotherapy (mainly paclitaxel). In the group of patient treated with trastuzumab and chemotherapy, they have shown a significantly positive correlation between level of HER-2 gene amplification and the clinical objective response.

Nevertheless, in a recent neoadjuvant study by Hurley et al. (38) evaluating trastuzumab plus docetaxel and cisplatin as primary systemic therapy for patients with HER-2–positive (IHC 2+/3+ or FISH positive) locally advanced breast cancer, no significant difference in pathologic complete response rates according to FISH status (FISH positive versus FISH negative) was found. Unexpectedly, FISH status also did not affect rates of either progression-free or overall survival in this study. Although our results seem to contradict this study, the population analyzed may be different. Indeed, IHC testing, used for the patient screening, seemed very sensitive in the Hurley et al. study, as only 60% of IHC 3+ tumors were FISH positive, whereas reported rates in the literature are ∼90% (18, 24, 25, 39). Although our study did not evaluate survival, these differing results about the relationship between FISH positivity and pathologic complete response highlight the need to standardize both IHC and FISH procedures for determination of HER-2 gene status.

Currently, there is variability with respect to HER-2 testing in terms of a particular commercial kit, antibody, probe, or cutoff value, and discrepancies due to variability between kits may occur (40). In terms of cutoff values with FISH amplification, our results, which were obtained on clinicopathologic data, are in line with those obtained with biological data in a recently published study by Dal Lago et al. (29) and those proposed recently by the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists (32). In the Dal Lago et al. study, cutoff values of 4 and 6 copies for no amplification and amplification were evaluated with single-color FISH. Good correlation only existed between the cutoff value of 6 and their mRNA assay.

The results of our study also highlight that accurate HER-2 testing is essential for optimal patient management with trastuzumab. In the neoadjuvant setting, initial IHC screening (which would be negative for the majority for tumors) could be used, followed by FISH testing for IHC 2+ or 3+ tumors. This supplementary FISH testing would exclude false-positive tumors by confirming HER-2 amplification and precisely determine the level of HER-2 amplification. This need of accuracy was particularly emphasized in two large trials that have shown discordance between local and central HER-2 testing for IHC (20) or for IHC and FISH (41).

In conclusion, our study showed a significantly positive correlation between pathologic complete response rate and level of HER-2 amplification as assessed by FISH in stage II/III breast tumors. These findings may have clinical implications for the management of patients with HER-2–positive locally advanced breast cancer. The degree of amplification as assessed by FISH may be an additional source of information for physicians wishing to clarify individual risk-benefit assessments for critical patients considering preoperative treatment with trastuzumab-based chemotherapy. However, it remains unknown whether a relationship exists between pathologic complete response, HER-2 level of amplification as assessed by FISH, and postoperative survival rates in women with HER-2–positive locally advanced breast cancer who are treated preoperatively with trastuzumab-based regimens. Further studies on the effect of level of HER-2 amplification on the behavior of tumors treated with trastuzumab in both the metastatic and adjuvant breast cancer settings are also needed.

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

Note: Presented in part at the 29th San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, San Antonio, TX, December 14-17, 2006.

We thank the Ligue de Cote d'Or Contre le Cancer, C. Harris, and D. James for assistance in manuscript preparation; Drs. J. Garnier and F. Campana (Roche Laboratories); Prof. N. Namer and P. Atalli (GETNA); and G. Milla (OSMO).

1
Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG, Levin WJ, Ullrich A, McGuire WL. Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene.
Science
1987
;
235
:
177
–82.
2
Slamon DJ, Godolphin W, Jones LA, et al. Studies of the HER-2/neu proto-oncogene in human breast and ovarian cancer.
Science
1989
;
244
:
707
–12.
3
Marty M, Cognetti F, Maraninchi D, et al. Randomized phase II trial of the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab combined with docetaxel in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer administered as first-line treatment: the M77001 study group.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
4265
–74.
4
Slamon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S, et al. Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2.
N Engl J Med
2001
;
344
:
783
–92.
5
Joensuu H, Kellokumpu-Lehtinen PL, Bono P, et al. Adjuvant docetaxel or vinorelbine with or without trastuzumab for breast cancer.
N Engl J Med
2006
;
354
:
809
–20.
6
Piccart-Gebhart MJ, Procter M, Leyland-Jones B, et al. Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer.
N Engl J Med
2005
;
353
:
1659
–72.
7
Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J, et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer.
N Engl J Med
2005
;
353
:
1673
–84.
8
Slamon D, Eiermann W, Robert N, Pienkowski T, Martin M, Pawlicki M. Phase III randomized trial comparing doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel (AC→T) with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel and trastuzumab (AC→TH) with docetaxel, carboplatin, and trastuzumab (TCH) in HER2 positive early breast cancer patients: BCIRG 006 study [abstract 1].
Breast Cancer Res Treat
2005
;
94
Suppl 1:
S5
.
9
Bines J, Murad A, Lago S, Ferrari B, Andrade J, Abdo E. Multicenter Brazilian study of weekly docetaxel and trastuzumab as primary therapy in stage III, HER-2 overexpressing breast cancer [abstract 268].
Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol
2003
;
22
:
242
.
10
Buzdar AU, Ibrahim NK, Francis D, et al. Significantly higher pathologic complete remission rate after neoadjuvant therapy with trastuzumab, paclitaxel, and epirubicin chemotherapy: results of a randomized trial in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
3676
–85.
11
Coudert BP, Arnould L, Moreau L, et al. Pre-operative systemic (neo-adjuvant) therapy with trastuzumab and docetaxel for HER2-overexpressing stage II or III breast cancer: results of a multicenter phase II trial.
Ann Oncol
2006
;
17
:
409
–14.
12
Van Pelt AE, Mohsin S, Elledge RM, et al. Neoadjuvant trastuzumab and docetaxel in breast cancer: preliminary results.
Clin Breast Cancer
2003
;
4
:
348
–53.
13
Coudert BP, Largillier R, Arnould L, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy with trastuzumab, docetaxel, and carboplatin for human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-overexpressing stage II or III breast cancer: results of a GETN(A) group and OSMO multicenter phase II trial (GETN[A]-1 trial).
J Clin Oncol
2007
;
25
:
2678
–84.
14
Sachelarie I, Grossbard ML, Chadha M, Feldman S, Ghesani M, Blum RH. Primary systemic therapy of breast cancer.
Oncologist
2006
;
11
:
574
–89.
15
Bast RC Jr, Ravdin P, Hayes DF, et al. 2000 Update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast and colorectal cancer: clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
J Clin Oncol
2001
;
19
:
1865
–78.
16
Goldhirsch A, Glick JH, Gelber RD, Coates AS, Thurlimann B, Senn HJ. Meeting highlights: international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2005.
Ann Oncol
2005
;
16
:
1569
–83.
17
Bilous M, Dowsett M, Hanna W, et al. Current perspectives on HER2 testing: a review of national testing guidelines.
Mod Pathol
2003
;
16
:
173
–82.
18
Diaz NM. Laboratory testing for HER2/neu in breast carcinoma: an evolving strategy to predict response to targeted therapy.
Cancer Control
2001
;
8
:
415
–8.
19
Van de Vijver M, Rueschoff J, Penault-Llorca F, Bilous M, Hanna W. Chromogenic in-situ hybridization (CISH) compared with FISH and IHC for detection of HER2 gene amplification: an international validation ring study. San Antonio (TX): 26th Annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2003.
20
Paik S, Bryant J, Tan-Chiu E, et al. Real-world performance of HER2 testing—National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2002
;
94
:
852
–4.
21
Roche PC, Suman VJ, Jenkins RB, et al. Concordance between local and central laboratory HER2 testing in the breast intergroup trial N9831.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2002
;
94
:
855
–7.
22
Vincent-Salomon A, MacGrogan G, Couturier J, et al. Calibration of immunohistochemistry for assessment of HER2 in breast cancer: results of the French multicentre GEFPICS study.
Histopathology
2003
;
42
:
337
–47.
23
Vincent-Salomon A, MacGrogan G, Couturier J, Arnould L, Mathoulin-Pelissier S. Re: HER2 testing in the real world.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2003
;
95
:
628
–9.
24
Ellis CM, Dyson MJ, Stephenson TJ, Maltby EL. HER2 amplification status in breast cancer: a comparison between immunohistochemical staining and fluorescence in situ hybridisation using manual and automated quantitative image analysis scoring techniques.
J Clin Pathol
2005
;
58
:
710
–4.
25
Wang S, Saboorian MH, Frenkel E, Hynan L, Gokaslan ST, Ashfaq R. Laboratory assessment of the status of Her-2/neu protein and oncogene in breast cancer specimens: comparison of immunohistochemistry assay with fluorescence in situ hybridisation assays.
J Clin Pathol
2000
;
53
:
374
–81.
26
Yaziji H, Gown AM. Accuracy and precision in HER2/neu testing in breast cancer: are we there yet?
Hum Pathol
2004
;
35
:
143
–6.
27
Burstein HJ, Harris LN, Gelman R, et al. Preoperative therapy with trastuzumab and paclitaxel followed by sequential adjuvant doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide for HER2 overexpressing stage II or III breast cancer: a pilot study.
J Clin Oncol
2003
;
21
:
46
–53.
28
Chevallier B, Roche H, Olivier JP, Chollet P, Hurteloup P. Inflammatory breast cancer. Pilot study of intensive induction chemotherapy (FEC-HD) results in a high histologic response rate.
Am J Clin Oncol
1993
;
16
:
223
–8.
29
Dal Lago L, Durbecq V, Desmedt C, et al. Correction for chromosome-17 is critical for the determination of true Her-2/neu gene amplification status in breast cancer.
Mol Cancer Ther
2006
;
5
:
2572
–9.
30
Isola J, Tanner M, Forsyth A, Cooke TG, Watters AD, Bartlett JM. Interlaboratory comparison of HER-2 oncogene amplification as detected by chromogenic and fluorescence in situ hybridization.
Clin Cancer Res
2004
;
10
:
4793
–8.
31
Vera-Roman JM, Rubio-Martinez LA. Comparative assays for the HER-2/neu oncogene status in breast cancer.
Arch Pathol Lab Med
2004
;
128
:
627
–33.
32
Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer.
J Clin Oncol
2007
;
25
:
118
–45.
33
Hanna WM, Kwok K. Chromogenic in situ hybridization: a viable alternative to fluorescence in situ hybridization in the HER2 testing algorithm.
Mod Pathol
2006
;
19
:
481
–7.
34
Tanner M, Gancberg D, Di LA, et al. Chromogenic in situ hybridization: a practical alternative for fluorescence in situ hybridization to detect HER-2/neu oncogene amplification in archival breast cancer samples.
Am J Pathol
2000
;
157
:
1467
–72.
35
Tanner M, Jarvinen P, Isola J. Amplification of HER-2/neu and topoisomerase IIα in primary and metastatic breast cancer.
Cancer Res
2001
;
61
:
5345
–8.
36
Cobleigh M, Vogel C, Tripathy D, Mass R, Murphy M, Press M. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) may accurately select patients likely to benefit from Herceptin monotherapy.
Eur J Cancer
2001
;
37
:
S192
.
37
Giuliani R, Durbecq V, Di LA, et al. Phosphorylated HER-2 tyrosine kinase and Her-2/neu gene amplification as predictive factors of response to trastuzumab in patients with HER-2 overexpressing metastatic breast cancer (MBC).
Eur J Cancer
2007
;
43
:
725
–35.
38
Hurley J, Doliny P, Reis I, et al. Docetaxel, cisplatin, and trastuzumab as primary systemic therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive locally advanced breast cancer.
J Clin Oncol
2006
;
24
:
1831
–8.
39
Couturier J, Vincent-Salomon A, Nicolas A, et al. Strong correlation between results of fluorescent in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry for the assessment of the ERBB2 (HER-2/neu) gene status in breast carcinoma.
Mod Pathol
2000
;
13
:
1238
–43.
40
Ellis IO, Bartlett J, Dowsett M, et al. Best practice no. 176: updated recommendations for HER2 testing in the UK.
J Clin Pathol
2004
;
57
:
233
–7.
41
Perez EA, Suman VJ, Davidson NE, et al. HER2 testing by local, central, and reference laboratories in specimens from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 intergroup adjuvant trial.
J Clin Oncol
2006
;
24
:
3032
–8.