Alberts S R, Ingle J N, Roche P R, Cha S S, Wold L E, Farr G H, Krook J E, Wieand H S
Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA.
Cancer. 1996 Aug 15;78(4):764-72. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960815)78:4<764::AID-CNCR12>3.0.CO;2-T.
The measurement of estrogen receptors (ER) in breast cancer specimens has traditionally been assessed with a dextran-coated charcoal assay (DCCA). More recently the immunohistochemical staining (IHC) method has gained increasing popularity because of its ability to use fixed tissue, assess needle biopsies, and reduce cost. Controversy exists over the accuracy of IHC compared with that of DCCA in determining ER. We compared these two techniques using tumor tissue obtained from a large group of females with lymph node positive breast carcinoma with long term follow-up.
Breast carcinoma tissue was obtained from a large group of females with node positive breast carcinoma participating in two adjuvant chemotherapy trials. ER was determined by the traditional DCCA method and by IHC using the ER1D5 antibody. Disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed by each of these methods.
ER status was determined by DCCA and IHC in tumor tissue obtained from 316 females. A concordance of 79% was observed for the determination of ER-positive tumors. Of the discordant results, the majority of DCCA-negative, IHC-positive tumors could be explained by a low level of DCCA positivity (< 10 fmol) or IHC staining of nonmalignant cells. A much higher rate of discordant results was observed in premenopausal females. Of the DCCA-negative, IHC-positive patients 97% were premenopausal and of the DCCA-positive, IHC-negative patients 79% were premenopausal. ER by DCC appears to perform better than ER by IHC as a prognostic factor in terms of DFS and OS.
When compared with DCCA, IHC with monoclonal antibody ER1D5 appears to be a reasonable substitute for the determination of ER. Although DCCA appeared to perform better as a determinant of prognosis, ER detection is used primarily for deciding on hormonal therapy. Review of discordant cases indicates IHC may more accurately reflect the ER status of malignant cells in some patients. Attention must be paid to quality control considerations in performance of IHC staining.
传统上,乳腺癌标本中雌激素受体(ER)的检测采用葡聚糖包被活性炭分析法(DCCA)。最近,免疫组织化学染色(IHC)方法因其能够使用固定组织、评估针吸活检以及降低成本而越来越受欢迎。在确定ER方面,与DCCA相比,IHC的准确性存在争议。我们使用从一大组有长期随访的淋巴结阳性乳腺癌女性中获得的肿瘤组织,对这两种技术进行了比较。
从参与两项辅助化疗试验的一大组淋巴结阳性乳腺癌女性中获取癌组织。通过传统的DCCA方法和使用ER1D5抗体的IHC来确定ER。用这两种方法评估无病生存期(DFS)和总生存期(OS)。
在从316名女性获得的肿瘤组织中,通过DCCA和IHC确定了ER状态。在确定ER阳性肿瘤方面,观察到一致性为79%。在不一致的结果中,大多数DCCA阴性、IHC阳性的肿瘤可以用低水平的DCCA阳性(<10 fmol)或非恶性细胞的IHC染色来解释。在绝经前女性中观察到更高的不一致结果率。在DCCA阴性、IHC阳性的患者中,97%为绝经前患者;在DCCA阳性、IHC阴性的患者中,79%为绝经前患者。就DFS和OS而言,作为预后因素,DCC法检测的ER似乎比IHC法检测的ER表现更好。
与DCCA相比,使用单克隆抗体ER1D5的IHC似乎是确定ER的合理替代方法。尽管DCCA作为预后决定因素表现更好,但ER检测主要用于决定激素治疗。对不一致病例的审查表明,IHC可能在某些患者中更准确地反映恶性细胞的ER状态。在进行IHC染色时必须注意质量控制方面的问题。