Automatically Diagnosing HER2 Amplification Status for Breast Cancer Patients Using Large FISH Images

Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is a technique that prepares acceptable results for molecular imaging biomarkers to precisely and dependably detect and diagnose disorders which are sign of cancers. Since contemporary manual FISH signal analysis is low-effective and inconsistent, it is an attractive research area to develop automated FISH image scanning systems and computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) schemes. The gene expression of epidermal growth factor receptors 2 (HER2) is highly related to results of patients with probable breast cancer. Although FISH technology outperforms other methods, yet it has so many drawbacks. Traditional approaches on FISH analysis are performed manually by clinician. This lets the results are highly dependent to human eye. Also FISH test colors constitutes of dark blue and black regions, it is reasonable that human eye will fail to distinguish between colors. Therefore, the success of computer vision algorithms compared to human eye in analyzing gene expression rate in FISH images will be discussed in this study. Another objective of this study is to expand a CAD program to evaluate HER2 status using acquired images that have MIRAX format. Different large FISH images were chosen for this study from pathology laboratory from Acibadem Maslak hospital. The proposed CAD scheme first applies pre-processing median and gaussian filters. An adaptive thresholding method followed by a watershed segmentation algorithm is employed to segment cells of interest areas. Furthermore, analyzable cells are found and nondetectable cells because of cell overlapping or image staining are discarded. The scheme then splits the detected analyzable region of interest into two red and green color spaces which is also followed by application of a scanning algorithm to detect the CEP17 green and HER2/neu red FISH signals separately. Finally, the proposed method calculates the ratio between independent green and red FISH signals of all analyzable cells identified on the image. The results express that the tool has the ability to automatically express HER2 status using very large FISH images. The results of the computer aided tool would lead to a more effective method in specifying HER2 state of probable patients.

Download Full Text

Breast Cancer, Medical diagnostic imaging, Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) image, HER2 testing

Quantitative output variables

The proposed method found a total of 113 cells shown on the image. In these 113 cells 231 red and 51 green FISH signals were separately recognized. In figure 2, as it is shown the method is applied on another FISH image and the detected "red" and "green" FISH signals were 234 and 36 respectively.The HER2 amplification ratio for figure 1 was 0.22 (<2.2)which classifies as a HER2 negative. As can be seen in figure 2, since this ratio was 0.15 (<2.2), this example was also classified as a HER2 negative. Because of considerable stain debris and cell overlapping in a number of images, no analyzable cells were processed in some regions in sample images (for instance region 22 in figure 1 (d)). The sample images which are not noisy and have analyzable cells could be detected with over 99 percent accuracy in the acquired dataset.





[1] Andrew D Carothers. Counting, measuring, and mapping in fish-labelled cells: Sample size considerations and implications for automation. Cytometry Part A, 16(4):298–304, 1994.
[2] Charles E Geyer, John Forster, Deborah Lindquist, Stephen Chan, C Gilles Romieu, Tadeusz Pienkowski, Agnieszka Jagiello-Gruszfeld, John Crown, Arlene Chan, Bella Kaufman, et al. Lapatinib plus capecitabine for her2-positive advanced breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 355(26):2733–2743, 2006.
[3] M Elizabeth H Hammond, Daniel F Hayes, Mitch Dowsett, D Craig Allred, Karen L Hagerty, Sunil Badve, Patrick L Fitzgibbons, Glenn Francis, Neil S Goldstein, Malcolm Hayes, et al. American society of clinical oncology/college of american pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer (unabridged version). Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine, 134(7):e48–e72, 2010.
[4] Wedad M Hanna, Josef Ruschoff, Michael Bilous, Renata A Coudry, ¨ Mitch Dowsett, Robert Y Osamura, Fred´ erique Penault-Llorca, Marc ´ Van De Vijver, and Giuseppe Viale. Her2 in situ hybridization in breast cancer: clinical implications of polysomy 17 and genetic heterogeneity. Modern Pathology, 27(1):4–18, 2014.
[5] Jocelyne Jacquemier, Fred´ erique Spyratos, Benjamin Esterni, Marie- ´ Joelle Mozziconacci, Martine Antoine, Laurent Arnould, Sarab Lizard, ¨ Philippe Bertheau, Jacqueline Lehmann-Che, Cecile Blanc Fournier, ´ et al. Sish/cish or qpcr as alternative techniques to fish for determination of her2 amplification status on breast tumors core needle biopsies: a multicenter experience based on 840 cases. BMC cancer, 13(1):351, 2013.
[6] Feng Jiang and Ruth L Katz. Use of interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization as a powerful diagnostic tool in cytology. Diagnostic Molecular Pathology, 11(1):47–57, 2002.
[7] Bela Kajt ´ ar, G ´ abor M ´ ehes, Thomas L ´ orch, Linda De ¨ ak, Marika Kneifn ´ e,´ Donat Alp ´ ar, and L ´ aszl ´ o Pajor. Automated fluorescent in situ hybridiza- ´ tion (fish) analysis of t (9; 22)(q34; q11) in interphase nuclei. Cytometry Part A, 69(6):506–514, 2006.
[8] Klim McPherson, CaMa Steel, and JM Dixon. Breast cancerepidemiology, risk factors, and genetics. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 321(7261):624, 2000.
[9] Mark D Pegram, Gottfried Konecny, and Dennis J Slamon. The molecular and cellular biology of her2/neu gene amplification/overexpression and the clinical development of herceptin (trastuzumab) therapy for breast cancer. In Advances in Breast Cancer Management, pages 57–75. Springer, 2000.
[10] Francesco Raimondo, Marios A Gavrielides, Georgia Karayannopoulou, Kleoniki Lyroudia, Ioannis Pitas, and Ioannis Kostopoulos. Automated evaluation of her-2/neu status in breast tissue from fluorescent in situ hybridization images. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 14(9):1288–1299, 2005.
[11] Xingwei Wang, Bin Zheng, Roy R Zhang, Shibo Li, Xiaodong Chen, John J Mulvihill, Xianglan Lu, Hui Pang, and Hong Liu. Automated analysis of fluorescent in situ hybridization (fish) labeled genetic biomarkers in assisting cervical cancer diagnosis. Technology in cancer research & treatment, 9(3):231–242, 2010.
[12] Antonio C Wolff, M Elizabeth H Hammond, David G Hicks, Mitch Dowsett, Lisa M McShane, Kimberly H Allison, Donald C Allred, John MS Bartlett, Michael Bilous, Patrick Fitzgibbons, et al. Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American society of clinical oncology/college of american pathologists clinical practice guideline update. Journal of clinical oncology, 31(31):3997–4013, 2013.

Other Articles

An Automated and Accurate Methodology to Assess Ki-67 Labeling Index of Immunohistochemical Staining Images of Breast Cancer Tissues

Automatic scoring of Ki-67 with digital image analysis would improve the accuracy of the diagnostic.

Read More

Automated Cell Segmentation and Spot Detection in Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization Staining to Assess HER2 Status in Breast Cancer

Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) approach is constituted of a pair of complementary techniques for precisely detecting...

Read More

Contact us
for more information

For more information about our solutions, you can contact us and request a demo.