J Cancer Prev.  2023 Jun;28(2):64-74. 10.15430/JCP.2023.28.2.64.

Immunohistochemistry versus PCR Technology for Molecular Subtyping of Breast Cancer: Multicentered Expereinces from Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Medical Biochemistry, College of Health Sciences, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
  • 2Department of Biochemistry, University of Global Health Equity, Kigali, Rwanda
  • 3Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Parasitology, School of Medicine, College of Health Sciences, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
  • 4Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, College of Health Sciences, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
  • 5Department of Pharmacology, School of Pharmacy, College of Health Sciences, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
  • 6Department of Pathology, College of Health Sciences, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Abstract

The application of immunohistochemistry (IHC) for molecular characterization of breast cancer (BC) is of paramount importance; however, it is not universally standardized, subject to observer variability and quantifying is a challenge. An alternative molecular technology, such as endpoint reverse transcription (RT)-PCR gene expression analysis, may improve observer variability and diagnostic accuracy. This study was intended to compare IHC with the RT-PCR based technique and assess the potential of RT-PCR for molecular subtyping of BC. In this comparative cross-sectional study, 54 BC tissues were collected from three public hospitals in Addis Ababa and shipped to Gynaecology department at Martin-Luther University (Germany) for laboratory analysis. Only 41 samples were qualified for IHC and RT-PCR investigation of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and Ki-67 protein expression analysis. Kappa statistics was used to assess the concordance between the two techniques. The overall percent agreement between RT-PCR and IHC was 68.3% for ER (positive percent agreement [PPA] 71.1%; negative percent agreement [NPA] 33.3%), 39.0% for PR (PPA 14.3%; NPA 92.3%), and 82.9% for HER2 (PPA 62.5%; NPA 87.9%). Cohen’s κ-values of 0.018 (< 0.20), 0.045 (< 0.200), and 0.481 (0.41-0.60) were generated for ER, PR, and HER2, respectively. Concordance for molecular subtypes was only 56.1% (23/41) and 0.20 kappa value. IHC and endpoint RTPCR techniques have shown to be discordant for 43% samples. Molecular subtyping using endpoint RT-PCR was fairly concordant with IHC. Thus, endpoint RT-PCR may give an objective result, and can be applied for BC subtyping.

Keyword

Breast cancer; Molecular subtypes; Immunohistochemistry; Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction
Full Text Links
  • JCP
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr