Is HER2 ultra-low breast cancer different from HER2 null or HER2 low breast cancer? A study of 1363 patients
Zhao‐Xu Chen, Huiqing Jia, Huina Zhang, Lifang Chen, Peng Zhao, Jing Zhao, Guangming Fu, Xiaoming Xing, Yujun Li, Chengqin Wang
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze whether there are any differences in clinicopathological features and prognosis between HER2 ultra-low, HER2-null, and HER2-low expression in Chinese breast cancer (BC) patients. METHODS: The clinicopathological data of 1363 HER2-negative BC patients were retrospectively collected (from January 2018 to December 2019). HER2 status was further classified into HER2-null, HER2 ultra-low, and HER2-low. HER2-null expression is defined as infiltrating cancer cells completely free of staining. HER2 ultra-low expression is defined as ≤10% of infiltrating cancer cells showing incomplete and faint/weak membrane staining. HER2-low expression is defined as HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) 1+ or 2+ with negative in situ hybridization (ISH) assay. RESULTS: Of 1363 patients, there were 86 (6.3%) HER2-null patients, 395 (29.0%) HER2 ultra-low patients, and 882 (64.7%) HER2-low patients. HER2 ultra-low patients were different from HER2-low patients in terms of N stage, hormone receptor (HR) status, Ki-67 expression, and type of surgery. There were also significant differences in histologic type and postoperative endocrine therapy between HER2 ultra-low and HER2-null patients. HR+ (81.0%) tumors was more common than HR- (19.0%) in HER2 ultra-low patients. In addition, there was a significant difference in HR status between HER2 ultra-low and HER2-low patients (P = 0.001). The survival analysis showed that HER2 status had no effect on disease-free survival (DFS) in HER2-negative patients (all P > 0.05). However, regardless of HER2 status, HR+ patients had better DFS than HR- patients (P = 0.003). Cox multivariate analysis revealed that age (HR [95% CI] = 0.950 [0.928, 0.972], P < 0.001), HR status (HR [95% CI] = 3.342 [1.658, 6.736], P = 0.001), and postoperative endocrine therapy (HR [95% CI] = 0.048 [0.048, 0.023], P < 0.001) were important influencing factors of DFS in HER2-negative BC patients. CONCLUSION: HER2 ultra-low BC patients demonstrated distinct clinicopathological features from HER2-null and HER2-low tumors; while, HER2 status (null, ultra-low, or low) had no prognostic value in these HER2-negative BC population. Consistent with the published literature, HR status was an independent prognostic factor for DFS in HER2-negative BC patients.