Impact of Specimen Type and Specimen Number on HER2 Status in Gastroesophageal Junction and Gastric Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) is expressed in some gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas. There were two goals: assess the impact of specimen type on HER2 status and evaluate HER2 concordance with multiple specimens. METHODS: All cases were evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC) for HER2 and interpreted using established criteria. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was performed on a subset. RESULTS: Of 460 specimens, 83.9% were IHC negative, 5.4% were equivocal, and 10.7% were IHC positive. Of those with FISH testing, 78.5% were FISH negative, and 21.5% were FISH positive. IHC-FISH concordance for biopsy specimens, resections, and metastases was 82%, 84%, and 86%, respectively. With one vs two vs three or more specimens, the HER2-positive rate increased from 10.5% to 18.1% to 24.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HER2 testing may be performed on biopsy specimens with a relatively high concordance rate with resection specimens, and if multiple samples are analyzed from a single patient, the HER2-positive rate increases over twofold.

Effect of Thin Prep(®) imaging system on laboratory rate and relative sensitivity of atypical squamous cells, high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion not excluded and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion interpretations.

INTRODUCTION: Automated screening of Thin Prep(®) Papanicolaou Tests has become increasingly common in clinical practice. Increased productivity has initiated laboratory use of the Thin Prep(®) Imaging System (TIS). Increased sensitivity is a potential additional benefit of TIS. Published studies have shown an increase in discovery of dysplastic cells. This study evaluates the effect of TIS on the incidence of atypical squamous cells high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion not excluded (ASC-H) and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HGSIL) results on Thin Prep(®) Pap Tests by comparing TIS-assisted and manual screening findings and the diagnoses on subsequent follow-up in a screening population over a 1-year time period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A compilation of all ASC-H and HGSIL cases was prepared by conducting a computerized search over a 1-year period (7/06-6/07). The accumulated cases include Thin Prep Pap tests that were both TIS and manually screened. Follow-up results of cytologic and histologic cervical specimens were obtained for a time period extending to 2010. Interpretation utilizing TIS was in place 10 months prior to the study's initiation. RESULTS: During the study period 70,522 Pap tests were performed in our laboratory. One third (33%) of Pap tests were screened with assistance of TIS. Manual screening was performed on 47,380 Pap tests of which 153 (0.32%) were interpreted as ASC-H and 164 (0.35%) were interpreted as HGSIL. During the same time period automated screening (TIS) was performed on 23,111 Pap tests. Interpretation of 62 (0.27%) cases provided an ASC-H result, while 71 (0.31%) were HGSIL. Follow-up cervical dysplasia by colposcopic biopsy and cone biopsy was distributed proportionally between TIS and manual screening for both ASC-H and HGSIL categories. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN II/III) was identified on follow-up biopsy of 41% TIS cases and 45% manually screened cases for ASC-H. In the HGSIL subset 71% of TIS cases and 69% manually screened cases showed CIN II/III on follow-up. TIS was 26% less sensitive relative to manual screening for ASC-H cases and 3% less sensitive for HGSIL. CONCLUSION: The similar rate of detection using TIS with an equal percentage of histologic correlation for ASC-H and HGSIL lesions on follow-up histology suggests patients screened by the TIS method are being sent for appropriate follow-up surveillance and treatment. A high-grade or possible high-grade lesion is as likely to be detected by TIS as by a manual screen. The similarities in relative sensitivity and specificity in a direct comparison between manual and TIS screening methodologies indicate that TIS compared to manual screening does not affect detection in patients with high-grade cervical lesions.