• Irene Terrenato, Ilaria Pennacchia, Simonetta Buglioni, Marcella Mottolese, and Vincenzo Arena.
• From the Biostatistics, Scientific Direction, Regina Elena National Cancer Institute (IT); Pathology Department Catholic University of Sacred Heart (IP, VA); and Pathology Department Regina Elena National Cancer Institute-Rome, Italy (SB, MM).
• Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 Apr 1; 94 (15): e645e645.

AbstractMisdiagnosis in the evaluation of HER2 status in breast cancer may have consequent negative impact on clinical decision-making. Therefore, it has become ever more important to share procedures and interpretation criteria for HER2 testing among laboratories. Herein, we report an interlaboratory survey among 9 hospitals located in the central-south regions of Italy. The centers sent a series of 36 slides, 4 for each HER2 score, to the revising centers. We found a good concordance in HER2 scoring for 0 and 3+ score, but a very low concordance for 1+ and 2+ scores. To focus on factors that may lead to discordant results, we report 4 cases which summarized the most common source of discrepancy in HER2 testing. This methodological approach will help the individual laboratory to minimize technical variables and to reduce the percentage of erroneous interpretations of HER2 status.

11 keywords...

hide…