Comparison of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Antibody Reagents Using Proficiency Testing Data
- Immunohistochemical analysis of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) expression in breast cancer is the current standard of care and directly determines therapy. In 2010 the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) published guidel...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976) 2017-10, Vol.141 (10), p.1402-1412 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1412 |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 1402 |
container_title | Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976) |
container_volume | 141 |
creator | Troxell, Megan L Long, Thomas Hornick, Jason L Ambaye, Abiy B Jensen, Kristin C |
description | - Immunohistochemical analysis of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) expression in breast cancer is the current standard of care and directly determines therapy. In 2010 the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) published guidelines for ER and PgR predictive testing, encompassing preanalytic, analytic, postanalytic factors; antibody validation; and proficiency testing.
- To compare the performance of different antibody reagents for ER and PgR immunohistochemical analysis by using CAP proficiency testing data.
- The CAP PM2 survey uses tissue microarrays of ten 2-mm cores per slide. We analyzed survey data from 80 ER and 80 PgR cores by antibody clone from more than 1200 laboratories.
- Laboratories used the ER antibodies SP1 (72%), 6F11 (17%), 1D5 (3%), and the PgR antibodies 1E2 (61%), 16 (12%), PgR-636 (13%), PgR-1294 (8%) in 2015. While 63 of 80 ER cores (79%) were scored similarly using each of the 3 antibodies, there were significant differences for others, with SP1 yielding more positive interpretations. Four cores were scored as ER negative by more than half of the laboratories using 1D5 or 6F11, while SP1 produced positive results in more than 70% of laboratories using that antibody. Despite the greater variety of PgR antibody reagents and greater PgR tumor heterogeneity, 61 of 80 cores (76%) were scored similarly across the 4 PgR antibodies.
- Accurate ER and PgR testing in breast cancer is crucial for appropriate treatment. The CAP proficiency testing data demonstrate differences in staining results by ER clone, with SP1 yielding more positive results. |
doi_str_mv | 10.5858/arpa.2016-0497-OA |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1920193830</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A508360929</galeid><sourcerecordid>A508360929</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-354473015ebd900e6e9be67bbf2507be9ebacf14e24ccb9a5017e4b4e466a8333</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkUFv2yAYhlG1qs26_oBeJkuTpl2cggHbHK206yZFSjW1ZwTkc-LIAQ_wIf--oHQ79AR8el706nsQuiN4yVve3is_qWWFSV1iJppy012gBeGMlhWp-Se0wBjTUoiWX6PPIRzSU1QVuULXVdsQ1tR8gdTKHSflh-Bs4friMUTvdmALZbfFc76GCN5ZKP6AgSk6X3Q2DtptT2miEhlD8RoGu8t0P5gBrDkVLymWZw8qqi_osldjgNv38wa9_nx8Wf0q15un36tuXRqGaSwpZ6yhmHDQW4Ex1CA01I3WfcVxo0GAVqYnDCpmjBaKY9IA0wxYXauWUnqDfpz_nbz7O6cC8jgEA-OoLLg5SCLSpgRtKU7otw_owc3epnaJqtOSGGsz9f1M7dQIcg9qjPvgxjkOzgbZcdzSzIoEkjNovAvBQy8nPxyVP0mCZRYlsyiZRcksSm66lPn6XmHWR9j-T_wzQ98AXgSPHw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1960924480</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Antibody Reagents Using Proficiency Testing Data</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Allen Press Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Troxell, Megan L ; Long, Thomas ; Hornick, Jason L ; Ambaye, Abiy B ; Jensen, Kristin C</creator><creatorcontrib>Troxell, Megan L ; Long, Thomas ; Hornick, Jason L ; Ambaye, Abiy B ; Jensen, Kristin C</creatorcontrib><description>- Immunohistochemical analysis of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) expression in breast cancer is the current standard of care and directly determines therapy. In 2010 the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) published guidelines for ER and PgR predictive testing, encompassing preanalytic, analytic, postanalytic factors; antibody validation; and proficiency testing.
- To compare the performance of different antibody reagents for ER and PgR immunohistochemical analysis by using CAP proficiency testing data.
- The CAP PM2 survey uses tissue microarrays of ten 2-mm cores per slide. We analyzed survey data from 80 ER and 80 PgR cores by antibody clone from more than 1200 laboratories.
- Laboratories used the ER antibodies SP1 (72%), 6F11 (17%), 1D5 (3%), and the PgR antibodies 1E2 (61%), 16 (12%), PgR-636 (13%), PgR-1294 (8%) in 2015. While 63 of 80 ER cores (79%) were scored similarly using each of the 3 antibodies, there were significant differences for others, with SP1 yielding more positive interpretations. Four cores were scored as ER negative by more than half of the laboratories using 1D5 or 6F11, while SP1 produced positive results in more than 70% of laboratories using that antibody. Despite the greater variety of PgR antibody reagents and greater PgR tumor heterogeneity, 61 of 80 cores (76%) were scored similarly across the 4 PgR antibodies.
- Accurate ER and PgR testing in breast cancer is crucial for appropriate treatment. The CAP proficiency testing data demonstrate differences in staining results by ER clone, with SP1 yielding more positive results.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-9985</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1543-2165</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1543-2165</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2016-0497-OA</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28714765</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: College of American Pathologists</publisher><subject>Antibodies, Monoclonal ; Antiestrogens ; Breast cancer ; Breast Neoplasms - pathology ; Cloning ; Endocrine therapy ; Estrogens ; Evaluation ; Female ; Gene expression ; Hormone receptors ; Humans ; Immunoglobulins ; Immunohistochemistry ; Indicators and Reagents - standards ; Laboratories ; Laboratory Proficiency Testing ; Medical protocols ; Methods ; Pathology, Clinical - standards ; Progesterone ; Receptors, Estrogen - analysis ; Receptors, Progesterone - analysis ; Studies ; Testing ; Tissue Array Analysis</subject><ispartof>Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976), 2017-10, Vol.141 (10), p.1402-1412</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2017 College of American Pathologists</rights><rights>Copyright College of American Pathologists Oct 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-354473015ebd900e6e9be67bbf2507be9ebacf14e24ccb9a5017e4b4e466a8333</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-354473015ebd900e6e9be67bbf2507be9ebacf14e24ccb9a5017e4b4e466a8333</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28714765$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Troxell, Megan L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Long, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hornick, Jason L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ambaye, Abiy B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jensen, Kristin C</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Antibody Reagents Using Proficiency Testing Data</title><title>Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976)</title><addtitle>Arch Pathol Lab Med</addtitle><description>- Immunohistochemical analysis of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) expression in breast cancer is the current standard of care and directly determines therapy. In 2010 the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) published guidelines for ER and PgR predictive testing, encompassing preanalytic, analytic, postanalytic factors; antibody validation; and proficiency testing.
- To compare the performance of different antibody reagents for ER and PgR immunohistochemical analysis by using CAP proficiency testing data.
- The CAP PM2 survey uses tissue microarrays of ten 2-mm cores per slide. We analyzed survey data from 80 ER and 80 PgR cores by antibody clone from more than 1200 laboratories.
- Laboratories used the ER antibodies SP1 (72%), 6F11 (17%), 1D5 (3%), and the PgR antibodies 1E2 (61%), 16 (12%), PgR-636 (13%), PgR-1294 (8%) in 2015. While 63 of 80 ER cores (79%) were scored similarly using each of the 3 antibodies, there were significant differences for others, with SP1 yielding more positive interpretations. Four cores were scored as ER negative by more than half of the laboratories using 1D5 or 6F11, while SP1 produced positive results in more than 70% of laboratories using that antibody. Despite the greater variety of PgR antibody reagents and greater PgR tumor heterogeneity, 61 of 80 cores (76%) were scored similarly across the 4 PgR antibodies.
- Accurate ER and PgR testing in breast cancer is crucial for appropriate treatment. The CAP proficiency testing data demonstrate differences in staining results by ER clone, with SP1 yielding more positive results.</description><subject>Antibodies, Monoclonal</subject><subject>Antiestrogens</subject><subject>Breast cancer</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Cloning</subject><subject>Endocrine therapy</subject><subject>Estrogens</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gene expression</subject><subject>Hormone receptors</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immunoglobulins</subject><subject>Immunohistochemistry</subject><subject>Indicators and Reagents - standards</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Laboratory Proficiency Testing</subject><subject>Medical protocols</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Pathology, Clinical - standards</subject><subject>Progesterone</subject><subject>Receptors, Estrogen - analysis</subject><subject>Receptors, Progesterone - analysis</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Testing</subject><subject>Tissue Array Analysis</subject><issn>0003-9985</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkUFv2yAYhlG1qs26_oBeJkuTpl2cggHbHK206yZFSjW1ZwTkc-LIAQ_wIf--oHQ79AR8el706nsQuiN4yVve3is_qWWFSV1iJppy012gBeGMlhWp-Se0wBjTUoiWX6PPIRzSU1QVuULXVdsQ1tR8gdTKHSflh-Bs4friMUTvdmALZbfFc76GCN5ZKP6AgSk6X3Q2DtptT2miEhlD8RoGu8t0P5gBrDkVLymWZw8qqi_osldjgNv38wa9_nx8Wf0q15un36tuXRqGaSwpZ6yhmHDQW4Ex1CA01I3WfcVxo0GAVqYnDCpmjBaKY9IA0wxYXauWUnqDfpz_nbz7O6cC8jgEA-OoLLg5SCLSpgRtKU7otw_owc3epnaJqtOSGGsz9f1M7dQIcg9qjPvgxjkOzgbZcdzSzIoEkjNovAvBQy8nPxyVP0mCZRYlsyiZRcksSm66lPn6XmHWR9j-T_wzQ98AXgSPHw</recordid><startdate>201710</startdate><enddate>201710</enddate><creator>Troxell, Megan L</creator><creator>Long, Thomas</creator><creator>Hornick, Jason L</creator><creator>Ambaye, Abiy B</creator><creator>Jensen, Kristin C</creator><general>College of American Pathologists</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201710</creationdate><title>Comparison of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Antibody Reagents Using Proficiency Testing Data</title><author>Troxell, Megan L ; Long, Thomas ; Hornick, Jason L ; Ambaye, Abiy B ; Jensen, Kristin C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-354473015ebd900e6e9be67bbf2507be9ebacf14e24ccb9a5017e4b4e466a8333</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Antibodies, Monoclonal</topic><topic>Antiestrogens</topic><topic>Breast cancer</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Cloning</topic><topic>Endocrine therapy</topic><topic>Estrogens</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gene expression</topic><topic>Hormone receptors</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immunoglobulins</topic><topic>Immunohistochemistry</topic><topic>Indicators and Reagents - standards</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Laboratory Proficiency Testing</topic><topic>Medical protocols</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Pathology, Clinical - standards</topic><topic>Progesterone</topic><topic>Receptors, Estrogen - analysis</topic><topic>Receptors, Progesterone - analysis</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Testing</topic><topic>Tissue Array Analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Troxell, Megan L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Long, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hornick, Jason L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ambaye, Abiy B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jensen, Kristin C</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Troxell, Megan L</au><au>Long, Thomas</au><au>Hornick, Jason L</au><au>Ambaye, Abiy B</au><au>Jensen, Kristin C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Antibody Reagents Using Proficiency Testing Data</atitle><jtitle>Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976)</jtitle><addtitle>Arch Pathol Lab Med</addtitle><date>2017-10</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>141</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1402</spage><epage>1412</epage><pages>1402-1412</pages><issn>0003-9985</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><eissn>1543-2165</eissn><abstract>- Immunohistochemical analysis of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) expression in breast cancer is the current standard of care and directly determines therapy. In 2010 the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) published guidelines for ER and PgR predictive testing, encompassing preanalytic, analytic, postanalytic factors; antibody validation; and proficiency testing.
- To compare the performance of different antibody reagents for ER and PgR immunohistochemical analysis by using CAP proficiency testing data.
- The CAP PM2 survey uses tissue microarrays of ten 2-mm cores per slide. We analyzed survey data from 80 ER and 80 PgR cores by antibody clone from more than 1200 laboratories.
- Laboratories used the ER antibodies SP1 (72%), 6F11 (17%), 1D5 (3%), and the PgR antibodies 1E2 (61%), 16 (12%), PgR-636 (13%), PgR-1294 (8%) in 2015. While 63 of 80 ER cores (79%) were scored similarly using each of the 3 antibodies, there were significant differences for others, with SP1 yielding more positive interpretations. Four cores were scored as ER negative by more than half of the laboratories using 1D5 or 6F11, while SP1 produced positive results in more than 70% of laboratories using that antibody. Despite the greater variety of PgR antibody reagents and greater PgR tumor heterogeneity, 61 of 80 cores (76%) were scored similarly across the 4 PgR antibodies.
- Accurate ER and PgR testing in breast cancer is crucial for appropriate treatment. The CAP proficiency testing data demonstrate differences in staining results by ER clone, with SP1 yielding more positive results.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>College of American Pathologists</pub><pmid>28714765</pmid><doi>10.5858/arpa.2016-0497-OA</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-9985 |
ispartof | Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976), 2017-10, Vol.141 (10), p.1402-1412 |
issn | 0003-9985 1543-2165 1543-2165 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1920193830 |
source | MEDLINE; Allen Press Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
subjects | Antibodies, Monoclonal Antiestrogens Breast cancer Breast Neoplasms - pathology Cloning Endocrine therapy Estrogens Evaluation Female Gene expression Hormone receptors Humans Immunoglobulins Immunohistochemistry Indicators and Reagents - standards Laboratories Laboratory Proficiency Testing Medical protocols Methods Pathology, Clinical - standards Progesterone Receptors, Estrogen - analysis Receptors, Progesterone - analysis Studies Testing Tissue Array Analysis |
title | Comparison of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Antibody Reagents Using Proficiency Testing Data |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T17%3A11%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Estrogen%20and%20Progesterone%20Receptor%20Antibody%20Reagents%20Using%20Proficiency%20Testing%20Data&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20pathology%20&%20laboratory%20medicine%20(1976)&rft.au=Troxell,%20Megan%20L&rft.date=2017-10&rft.volume=141&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1402&rft.epage=1412&rft.pages=1402-1412&rft.issn=0003-9985&rft.eissn=1543-2165&rft_id=info:doi/10.5858/arpa.2016-0497-OA&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA508360929%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1960924480&rft_id=info:pmid/28714765&rft_galeid=A508360929&rfr_iscdi=true |