Comparing CISH and FISH for HER2 Status in Breast Cancer
Author Information
Author(s): Arnould L, Denoux Y, MacGrogan G, Penault-Llorca F, Fiche M, Treilleux I, Mathieu M C, Vincent-Salomon A, Vilain M O, Couturier J
Hypothesis
Is chromogenic in situ hybridisation (CISH) as effective as fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) for determining HER2 status in breast cancer?
Conclusion
CISH is a reliable alternative to FISH for determining HER2 gene status in breast cancer, especially in laboratories lacking fluorescence microscopy.
Supporting Evidence
- CISH was successful in 94.9% of cases, showing high reliability.
- Agreement between CISH and FISH was found in 96% of tumors.
- CISH does not require expensive fluorescence microscopy, making it more accessible.
- Pathologists are more familiar with CISH due to its similarity to IHC.
- Polysomy of chromosome 17 was more frequently observed in IHC 2+ tumors.
Takeaway
This study looked at two methods to check if a breast cancer gene is active. It found that one method, CISH, works just as well as the other, FISH.
Methodology
The study analyzed 79 breast tumors from eight laboratories, comparing HER2 status determined by CISH and FISH.
Potential Biases
Potential bias due to the selection of tumors and the reliance on specific laboratory techniques.
Limitations
The study was limited to tumors from specific laboratories and may not represent all breast cancer cases.
Participant Demographics
Tumors were collected from eight different French laboratories.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<10−9
Statistical Significance
p<10−9
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website