This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Introduction Breast cancer (BC) is the second most common cancer in Indian women. Overexpression /amplification of Her2/neu is detected in approximately 20% to 30% cases. Apart from the classical amplified and non-amplified signal patterns, ‘nonclassical’ FISH (fluorescence in situ hybridization) patterns are recognized where in the ratio and signals/cell data would independently yield different results or results that are close to a threshold, the relevance of which is unknown and require further study. Aims and objectives To delineate the spectrum of Her-2 Neu FISH signal patterns in immunohistochemically equivocal cases of BC. Materials and methods Retrospective data of 393 cases of Her2 equivocal (Score 2 + by immunohistochemistry) cases were collected from the electronic medical records of the oncopathology department over a 3-year period (2020–2022). Demographic data, hormone receptor status were recorded and subjected to FISH by the ERBB2/CEN 17 Dual Color Probe and analyzed according to ASCO-CAP 2018 guidelines. Results Females and males comprised (96.43%, n = 379) and (3.56%, n = 14) respectively. The age range was 26–85 years (mean 52.36 year). The sites included breast primary (95.6%, n = 374) and metastatic sites (4.83%, n = 19). FISH analysis revealed about 18.32% amplified cases [ (classic amplified (10.94%) low amplified (6.8%) and co-amplified (0.5%)]. Other signal patterns observed were classic non amplified (70.99%), equivocal (6.1%), monosomy (1.52%) and heterogenous (2.54%). Polysomy (mean of > = 3 CEP17 signals per nucleus) was observed in 8.9% cases. Conclusion This is one of the few studies delineating the spectrum of FISH signals. It would be better to consider all the clinicopathologic features on a case-by-case basis when determining whether to offer HER2-targeted therapies in non classic amplified patterns. Clinical trial registration Not applicable.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paul et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: