Computer-aided scoring of erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (HER2) gene amplification status in breast cancer

Alyson Yoder; Landon J Inge; Chen-Chun Chen; Vijay R Marati; Trung Kien Nguyen; Karel Zuiderveld; Jim Martin; Sarah Gladden; Mohammad Saleh Miri; Raghavan Venugopal; Bryan Lopez; Jim Ranger-Moore; Christoph Guetter

doi:10.1016/j.jpi.2022.100116

Computer-aided scoring of erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (HER2) gene amplification status in breast cancer

J Pathol Inform. 2022 Jul 5:13:100116. doi: 10.1016/j.jpi.2022.100116. eCollection 2022.

Affiliation

¹ Ventana Medical Systems, Inc., Tucson, AZ, USA.

Abstract

Background: Identification of HER2 protein overexpression and/or amplification of the HER2 gene are required to qualify breast cancer patients for HER2 targeted therapies. In situ hybridization (ISH) assays that identify HER2 gene amplification function as a stand-alone test for determination of HER2 status and rely on the manual quantification of the number of HER2 genes and copies of chromosome 17 to determine HER2 amplification.

Methods: To assist pathologists, we have developed the uPath HER2 Dual ISH Image Analysis for Breast (uPath HER2 DISH IA) algorithm, as an adjunctive aid in the determination of HER2 gene status in breast cancer specimens. The objective of this study was to compare uPath HER2 DISH image analysis vs manual read scoring of VENTANA HER2 DISH-stained breast carcinoma specimens with ground truth (GT) gene status as the reference. Three reader pathologists reviewed 220, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) breast cancer cases by both manual and uPath HER2 DISH IA methods. Scoring results from manual read (MR) and computer-assisted scores (image analysis, IA) were compared against the GT gene status generated by consensus of a panel of pathologists. The differences in agreement rates of HER2 gene status between manual, computer-assisted, and GT gene status were determined.

Results: The positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) rates for image analysis (IA) vs GT were 97.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 95.0, 99.3) and 94.3% (95% CI: 90.8, 97.3) respectively. Comparison of agreement rates showed that the lower bounds of the 95% CIs for the difference of PPA and NPA for IA vs MR were -0.9% and -6.2%, respectively. Further, inter- and intra-reader agreement rates in the IA method were observed with point estimates of at least 96.7%.

Conclusions: Overall, our data show that the uPath HER2 DISH IA is non-inferior to manual scoring and supports its use as an aid for pathologists in routine diagnosis of breast cancer.

Keywords: Algorithm; Breast cancer; Bright-field ISH; HER2; Image analysis.