Semi-automated analysis of HER2 immunohistochemistry in invasive breast carcinoma using whole slide images: utility for interpretation in clinical practice

TL;DR

This study evaluates a semi-automated tool for analyzing HER2 immunohistochemistry in breast cancer, showing it can help provide objective and accurate results for clinical treatment decisions.

Contribution

The study introduces a semi-automated HER2 IHC analysis tool that demonstrates high concordance with manual scoring and potential for clinical use.

Findings

Semi-automated HER2 IHC scoring showed a Kappa value of 0.77 in the calibration dataset, indicating substantial agreement with manual scoring.

The tool achieved 100% sensitivity and 56-61% specificity in detecting HER2 amplification.

Only 17% of validation cases had discordant results between manual and semi-automated analysis.

Abstract

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) gene amplification and subsequent protein overexpression is a strong prognostic and predictive biomarker in invasive breast carcinoma (IBC). ASCO/CAP recommended tests for HER2 assessment include immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or in situ hybridization (ISH). Accurate HER2 IHC scoring (0, 1+, 2+, 3+) is key for appropriate classification and treatment of IBC. HER2-targeted therapies, including anti-HER2 monoclonal antibodies and antibody drug conjugates (ADC), have revolutionized the treatment of HER2-positive IBC. Recently, ADC have also been approved for treatment of HER2-low (IHC 1+, IHC 2+/ISH-) advanced breast carcinoma, making a distinction between IHC 0 and 1+ crucial. In this focused study, 32 IBC with HER2 IHC scores from 0 to 3+ and HER2 FISH results formed a calibration dataset, and 77 IBC with HER2 IHC score 2+ and paired FISH results (27 amplified, 50 non-amplified) formed a validation dataset. H&E and HER2 IHC whole slide images (WSI) were scanned. Regions of interest were manually annotated and IHC scores generated by the software QuantCenter (MembraneQuant application) by 3DHISTECH Ltd. (Budapest, Hungary) and compared to the microscopic IHC score. H-scores [(3×%IHC3+) +(2×%IHC2+) +(1×%IHC1+)] were calculated for semi-automated (MembraneQuant) analysis. Concordance between microscopic IHC scoring and 3DHISTECH MembraneQuant semi-automated scoring in the calibration dataset showed a Kappa value of 0.77 (standard error 0.09). Microscopic IHC and MembraneQuant image analysis for the detection of HER2 amplification yielded a sensitivity of 100% for both and a specificity of 56% and 61%, respectively. In the validation set of IHC 2+ cases, only 13 of 77 cases (17%) had discordant results between microscopic and MembraneQuant images, and various artifacts limiting the interpretation of HER2 IHC, including cytoplasmic/granular staining and crush artifact were noted. Semi-automated analysis using WSI and microscopic evaluation yielded similar HER2 IHC scores, demonstrating the potential utility of this tool for interpretation in clinical practice and subsequent accurate treatment. In this study, it was shown that semi-automatic HER2 IHC interpretation provides an objective approach to a test known to be quite subjective.

Figures