HER2 Second opinion pathology test: same slides or new biopsy?

Options
SccS
SccS Member Posts: 78

Hello,

In 2009 one hospital's report showed HER2 positive for my wife's breast cancer. She declined any treatment at that point (please don't blame... not important right now).

A different hospital took new biopsies and studied mastectomy tissue in 2012 and said it's HER2 negative, so no Herceptin was given, but the rest of the lovely cocktail (chemo, rads, mastectomy). We asked the same hospital to re-test original slides from the first hospital from 2009 - and they said it's HER2 negative! So they disagreed with the first lab. Now, her cancer is everywhere. We suspect that the second hospital didn't interpret HER2 properly and caused treatment without Herceptin, which resulted in whole body metastasis. All of the second hospital's FISH reports were signed by a same person.

Now the same (second) hospital is scheduled to perform a liver biopsy in few days....

Here's my question:

Should we let them do it and then request another hospital to re-study the slides, or the results of FISH test depends on how the slides were prepared? Can the second opinion (from a different hospital) lab say "tissue was not prepared the way we prepare it, therefore our study will show the same FISH results as the lab that prepared the slides"? In other words, can second lab study same samples that were prepared by first lab and yet disagree on the FISH results, or that's strictly dependent on how the tissue was prepared?

Thanks.

P.S. We're in NYC.

Comments

  • Hernie
    Hernie Member Posts: 1,016
    edited November 2016

    SccS, I am assuming that the 2012 re-test was a "new" FISH analysis of the slides that had been prepared (but not analysed) in 2009, is that correct? If the 2012 re-test was simply looking at slides that had been analysed three years earlier, the fluorscent signal would have had faded over that time.

    Errors in the FISH test are most likely to come from errors in the tricky FISH process itself, not the prior preparation of the slide (which is pretty basic) or in the scoring of the slide as negative or positive (which should be very clear).

    Keeping in mind that Her2 status can change over time, you can have them make some extra back-up slides. If the next test is Her2 positive, you won't need them. If it is negative, you can send the back-up slides to another lab for a complete new FISH analysis.

    Best wishes to your wife!

  • SccS
    SccS Member Posts: 78
    edited November 2016

    Hernie,

    Thanks. If we do have back up slides, will the other lab consider them suitable for their FISH test or they can say that they are not prepared the way THEY prepare them, thus forcing us to have a new biopsy by the clinic that's affiliated with this other lab?

    To answer your question: In 2009 FISH was done and results were HER2 positive. In 2012 a different lab studied NEWLY acquired samples and said they are FISH2 negative. Then the same (second) lab re-tested slides from original (first) lab from 2009 and said they were HER2 negative.

  • Hernie
    Hernie Member Posts: 1,016
    edited November 2016

    Simple answer, no. I can't see that happening. Slide prep is a basic procedure, done the same way for decades. It's the FISH analysis itself that is more delicate.

    Don't think about a second biopsy right now. Just get through this one. One step at a time.

  • SccS
    SccS Member Posts: 78
    edited November 2016

    Well, the reason I'm asking is that we are not sure if she should proceed with the biopsy in this same hospital that had repeatedly found her to be HER2 negative, the biopsy there is scheduled for this Wednesday.

    Or we should cancel this appointment and go to another hospital which would have a fresh look at everything. It would be convenient to proceed as scheduled though, and later have another hospital to re study the slides if that is possible to do accurately.

  • Hernie
    Hernie Member Posts: 1,016
    edited November 2016

    The current hospital disagreed with another hospital on HER2 status of 2009. We don't know what the first hospital would have found in 2012.

    Questioning whether lab results are reliable for big treatment decisions is a legitimate question. HER2 is known to change between primary and metastatic tumors. The issue of where these changes were real or lab error was looked at in this study. It found that local labs (in the hospital) had a higher rate of HER2 changes between primary to metastatic tumors (16%) than central labs (3%). Even more interesting, the central labs found only changes negative-to-positive, but local labs found them both directions, evenly split.

    This raises the question of whether your hospital's HER2 tests were done in-house or by a central lab. If it is local, you could get the hospital to use a specialist lab with more experience.If they were done by a central lab, then (a) it is probably more reliable and (b) the next hospital might be using the same lab anyway.

    Changing hospital's means delay in diagnosis and treatment, and you are going into an unknown. Were you otherwise happy with the hospital and your wife's oncologists? Do you feel comfortable asking them questions? I know that oncologists are swamped with work, but you should expect that they take your concerns seriously, whatever they may be. You will never know for sure if the lab was right in 2012, but you know how the hospital treated you through your wife's last ordeal.

  • SccS
    SccS Member Posts: 78
    edited November 2016

    How can I find a good central lab? Any recommendations??? I'm sure all the tests were done in the hospital lab. It's Mt Sinai/Beth Israel hospital in Manhattan, NYC.

    We can't be happy with the clinic since all cancer came back and worse. The doctor is not very compationate, to say the least. I'd say we're 50% happy... or actually indiffe

  • SccS
    SccS Member Posts: 78
    edited November 2016

    Is John Hopkins Ok? I'm trying to work with them right now for the second opinion test.

  • Hernie
    Hernie Member Posts: 1,016
    edited November 2016

    It sounds like your doctor is the real issue. The lab is only a small part of the treatment plan. A good doctor would have made sure that issues like the lab results are solved.

    Now that your wife is metastatic, it is reasonable to get a second opininion. But you can't do that without biopsy results.

    Since any new appointments take time, and since we don't know if the lab is a real issue or not, I am inclined to do the biopsy on Wednesday. Then with the results in hand, see what treatment plan your doctor proposes. Ask him what expert he would suggest for a second opinion. You can also ask what doctor is running clinical trials, if you are willing to do that route. You can take his suggestion, or choose your own candidate, but do the leg work. You should be doing it anyway, just to be sure of the treatment plan, but you might also find a doctor that is more helpful.

  • SccS
    SccS Member Posts: 78
    edited November 2016

    Is John Hopkins ok for a second opinion pathology study??

    She refuses to do chemo anymore, and she will take Herceptin only, and (of course) if she is HER2 positive. So I don't see how a second opinion would affect the treatment if she won't take chemo. Only if her test comes out as HER2 negative and a second option doctor would do Herceptin anyway, basing on the very first HER2 positive result (which was disproved later). I'm trying to have them send the pathology results to two labs at the same time. Or, maybe one after another....

  • Hernie
    Hernie Member Posts: 1,016
    edited November 2016

    I am not in the US so I can't comment on specific labs. Maybe others can contribute their experience.

    I doubt that a doctor would give Herceptin based on 2009 biopsy tests. If your wife is HER2 negative, it won't help anyway.

    Finally, off-topic but more important, I totally get your wife's fear of more chemo, but in metastatic disease, it's not the same chemo she had before. In the early stages, chemo basically shoots anything that moves. In stage four, the drugs are chosen to be specific for the tumor to give better effects with fewer side effects. I am so far one year on Kadcyla and have essentially no side effects and best of all, no progression. I know your wife is in an emotional black hole now but she should not give up just yet.

  • SccS
    SccS Member Posts: 78
    edited November 2016

    Kadcyla is for HER2 cancers. If she is not HER2 then the only option is chemo. Since strong chemo didn't work first time, my wife doesn't believe that a weaker chemo regiment will work on more progressed cancer.... I tend to agree with her. This logic is awkward and we don't understand why doctors follow it.

    She had liver biopsy today. After we get the results, we will request slides sent to another lab.

    Hernie, thank you for your support. Be well.

  • SccS
    SccS Member Posts: 78
    edited November 2016

    My wife's liver biopsy results came as HER2+ this time. So it was HER2 positive in 2009, then negative in 2012, then retested samples of 2009 and said to be negative, and now liver metastasis came as positive.

    So it looks like she had HER2 positive cancer all these years but was never treated with Herceptin. Did her doctor in 2012 made a mistake by not giving her Herceptin when there was a hint about her cancer being HER2 positive? Is that enough to pursue legal matters??

    Hernie, how often do you take Kadcyla? IV only? Is Kadcyla superior to Herceptin?

  • Hernie
    Hernie Member Posts: 1,016
    edited November 2016

    In our messed up world, that is good news! If your going to have a met, make it HER2+. Thank you Dr Slamon, for giving us a weapon to fight this beast!

    Herceptin (trastuzumab -- the ab means antibody) is an antibody against HER2. Kadcyla (trastuzumab emtansine) is the antibody with a chemo drug attached to it.

    Kadcyla is an IV infusion every 3 weeks, just like Herceptin. It is given with antihistamines as premeds. I also have blood tests between infusions and a check of my heart every 3 months.

    For me, the main side effect was fatigue in the weeks after each infusion, but that got slowly better over time. I was just so weak after my brain surgery that anything more was hard to take, but I was active as much as I was comfortable with, no pushing it, and I was able to slowly regain strength and find my own new level of activity.

    Regarding legal action, I don't see the case. The 2009 slides were retested, so the question about the negative HER2 test was indeed followed up. Herceptin has its own risks (mainly heart failure) so it cannot be given without good reason. In 2012, HER2 was not shown on the current tumor, so the decision not to give Herceptin was reasonable, given the information available at the time.

    Many of us with mets can look back at medical blunders that might have kept us out of the hole we are in. I would guess that there are more than we even know, never mind all the uncounted poisons in our air, food, and water. But that's our world and that's the way it is. I am just happy that we do live in a time of modern medicine -- and no more witch burning! Life's a bitch. Life is glorious. Let's enjoy every minute!

  • SccS
    SccS Member Posts: 78
    edited November 2016

    Hernie, thanks.

    I, personally, don't see modern medicine any different from witch burning. I'm sure 1000 years from now people will look back at our medicine and feel just like we feel about witch hunts in the past. And not because medicine will be advanced, but due to the fact that the cure now is being supressed and carefully hudden for at least 70 years because the cure would have cut immense profit to some persons. How can you make quadrillions of dollars if all it takes to cure is one tablet?

    But what if another lab re tests slides from both 2012 and original hospital in 2009 and finds out that they are all HER2 positive? Will that make a case? All tests in 2012 were signed by the same pathologist....

    Do you think Kadcyla is superior to Herceptin or they are different and for some patients chemo in Kadcyla can do more harm that what Herceptin would have done?

Categories