Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Disease Markers
Volume 2015 (2015), Article ID 234851, 10 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/234851
Review Article

HER2 Status in Premalignant, Early, and Advanced Neoplastic Lesions of the Stomach

1Department of Human Pathology “Gaetano Barresi”, Section of Anatomic Pathology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria “Gaetano Martino, University of Messina,” Via Consolare Valeria 1, 98125 Messina, Italy
2Department of Pediatrics, Gynecology and Microbiology Sciences, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria “Gaetano Martino, University of Messina,” Via Consolare Valeria 1, 98125 Messina, Italy

Received 5 June 2015; Accepted 30 July 2015

Academic Editor: Omeed Moaven

Copyright © 2015 A. Ieni et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Objectives. HER2 expression in gastric cancer (GC) has received attention as a potential target for therapy with Trastuzumab. We reviewed the current knowledge on HER2 status in premalignant gastric lesions and in early (EGC) and advanced (AGC) GC to discuss the possible pathogenetic and prognostic roles of HER2 overexpression in GC. Results. HER2 overexpression was documented in gastric low-grade (LG) and high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HG-IEN), with higher frequency in gastric type dysplasia. HER2 overexpression was significantly associated with disease recurrence and poor prognosis in EGC representing an independent risk factor for lymph node metastases. HER2 overexpression was more frequent in AGC characterized by high grade, advanced stage, and high Ki-67 labeling index. The discordance in HER2 status was evidenced between primitive GC and synchronous or metachronous metastases. Conclusions. HER2 overexpression in premalignant gastric lesions suggests its potential involvement in the early steps of gastric carcinogenesis. The assessment of HER2 status in EGC may be helpful for the identification of patients who are at low risk for developing nodal metastases. Finally, the possible discordance in HER2 status between primary GC and its synchronous metastases support routine assessment of HER2 both in the primary GC and in its metastatic lesions.

1. Introduction

Although the incidence and mortality from gastric carcinoma (GC) significantly decreased over the last fifty years, this tumor still represents the third most common malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer death worldwide [1]. The high mortality rate from GC is mainly related to late diagnosis and to the lack of programs for early detection of this tumor [24]. The EUROCARE-5 results show that the 5-year survival rate to GC is 25.1%, with a significant difference recorded between men and women [1]. Of note, survival with GC varies depending upon the geographic area, with the highest survival rate observed in southern and central Europe and the lowest in Eastern Europe, United Kingdom, and Ireland [1]. Among the European countries, a high incidence of mortality from GC is encountered in Italy [2, 5, 6]; interestingly, a remarkable peculiar geographic variation was reported in this country [2, 5, 6] with the highest death rate in central and northern regions and the lowest in southern Italy [2, 6, 7].

Although the infection from Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is a known trigger of gastric carcinogenesis, many other external and internal events play a role in the development of this neoplasia [8]. Microscopically, GC is preceded by several precancerous lesions, including atrophic gastritis, hyperplasia, intestinal metaplasia, and dysplasia [814]. Those conditions are characterized by the accumulation of multiple genetic abnormalities, such as oncogene activation, tumor suppressor gene inactivation, and telomerase reactivation [15, 16], which may originate in part from chromosomal instability (CIN) [16, 17]. The latter consists in the loss or gain of whole chromosomes with aneuploidy and altered DNA copy number or in the partial alteration of chromosomes due to translocation, amplification, or deletion [17, 18]. Hence CIN may lead to the loss or gain of oncogenes, tumor suppressor genes, or genes involved in DNA repair or cell cycle checkpoints [17, 18]. Recently, the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project classified tumors with CIN as a distinct biomolecular subgroup of GC characterized by the frequent amplification of genes such as HER2, EGFR, MET, FGFR2, and RAS genes (KRAS/NRAS) which are all related to the receptor tyrosine kinase RTK/RAS signaling [19]. In particular, HER2 gene encodes for HER2/erbB2 protein which belongs to the epidermal growth factor receptor family that comprises three other proteins with a similar structure, namely, HER1/erbB1, HER3/erbB3, and HER4/erbB4. HER2 plays an important role in the proliferation and differentiation of normal cells [20] and binding to its ligand gives rise to the creation of homodimers and heterodimers and activation of downstream signaling pathways [20]. Any aberrations in the structure or function of this receptor may lead to uncontrolled cell proliferation, neoplastic development, and progression [20]. Trastuzumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively targets HER2 receptor and inhibits its downstream signaling pathways in cells with HER2 overexpression [21]. A recent phase III randomized study (ToGA) demonstrated a significant survival benefit in patients affected by advanced GC with HER2 overexpression and treated with combined Trastuzumab and chemotherapy [22]. Hence, in recent years, the evaluation of HER2 overexpression has received attention as a target for novel therapeutic strategies aimed at increasing the survival to GC. In addition, assessment of HER2 status in all GCs at the time of diagnosis has been recommended in order to establish patient eligibility for treatment with Trastuzumab.

In this paper we review the controversial role of HER2 in gastric cancerogenesis and focus on the prevalence and potential prognostic significance of HER2 expression in preneoplastic lesions as well as in early and advanced GC.

2. HER2 in Premalignant Gastric Lesions

Although chronic atrophic gastritis and intestinal metaplasia of the stomach are considered to be preneoplastic lesions of GC, some Japanese studies do not clearly indicate a role in gastric carcinogenesis [23, 24]. Therefore dysplasia of the gastric mucosa represents the only universally accepted precancerous lesion of GC. Dysplasia is characterized by a wide range of cellular and structural atypia and it is defined as intraepithelial neoplasia (IEN), a pathological condition which lies between atrophic gastritis and GC [25]. IEN may develop in the gastric epithelium affected or not by intestinal metaplasia and it can be classified into four categories: indefinite for intraepithelial neoplasia, low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (LG-IEN), high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HG-IEN), and suspicious for invasive cancer [26, 27]. The histological distinction between LG and HG IEN relies on the severity of architectural and cytological atypia. In detail, in LG-IEN the mucosa maintains tubular differentiation and the proliferative zone is limited to the outward portion, while in HG-IEN mucosal architecture is distorted and shows crowded irregular glands with marked cellular atypia and diffuse proliferative activity [28]. HG-IEN is associated with increased risk of GC [2831]. Compared to LG-IEN, it is characterized by higher frequency of genetic abnormalities, including 8q gain, p53 overexpression, e-cadherin loss, and HER2 amplification, which are also present in invasive GC [3236].

The possible occurrence of HER2 amplification in precancerous lesions was previously investigated in bronchial and breast epithelia [3740]. HER2 amplification was evidenced in bronchial dysplasia with a role in cellular proliferation, but not in the progression to invasive carcinoma [37, 38]. In addition, HER2 overexpression was documented in breast ductal carcinoma in situ with negative prognostic significance, but not in benign and atypical proliferative lesions [39, 40].

Only few studies investigated HER2 overexpression in gastric dysplasia [36, 4146]. In a series of surgical and bioptic samples, HER2 immunostaining with 2+/3+ score was evidenced in 12.6% of HG-IEN (Figure 1, authors’ collection). Benign gastric mucosa did not show HER2 positivity in any of the specimens, although weak membranous reaction in the foveolae and cytoplasmic staining in specialized glands were observed, as elsewhere previously reported. The comparison of HER2 status between dysplasia and invasive GC showed six cases with concordant 3+ HER2 reactivity and seven with discordant HER2 status; in detail, three cases showed HER2 positivity in the dysplastic epithelium but not in the invasive GC, four cases displayed HER2 overexpression in GC but not in dysplasia [46]. It may be argued that the possible discordant HER2 status between paired dysplasia and GC should indicate that extrapolation of HER2 status of invasive carcinoma based on that observed in dysplasia is not reliable. Moreover, it may pose practical difficulties in assessing HER2 expression in biopsies with high-grade dysplasia transiting to carcinoma, determining false positive results in biopsies, due to the misinterpretation of HER2-positive dysplasia as invasive carcinoma [46].

Figure 1: 3+ intense HER2 immunoreactivity in gastric HG-IEN. Note absence of staining in normal glands (original magnification, ×400: Mayer’s Haemalum nuclear counterstain).

HER2 overexpression has been also documented in LG-IEN, although with significantly lower frequency (4–8%) compared to that found in HG-IEN (16–20%) [4143]. On the whole, these findings suggest that HER2 overexpression characterizes the early steps of gastric carcinogenesis [4143]. However, the absence of HER2 overexpression in invasive GC matching HER2-positive dysplasia indicates that this molecular deregulation may involve only a subset of cells in the intraepithelial neoplastic population [42].

By using immunohistochemistry, gastric dysplasia has been also classified into adenomatous/type I (intestinal phenotype), which is characterized by immunostaining for CD10 and CDX2; foveolar or pyloric/type II (gastric phenotype), which shows staining for MUC5AC and MUC6 and absence of CD10 expression; hybrid, which displays a mixed phenotype; null, when none of the aforementioned markers is expressed [4750]. HER2 amplification was observed in cases classified as gastric or hybrid, which suggests that this type of dysplasia may represent the precursor of gastric type adenocarcinoma originating de novo from gastric mucosa [50]. An extensive analysis of HER2 status in immunoclassified gastric dysplasia may help to identify those patients at higher risk to develop a specific type of cancer, although the relationship between HER2 overexpression and progression of dysplasia to GC still requires further investigation.

3. HER2 in Early Gastric Cancer

There is some evidence that the identification of precursor lesions may be helpful for the early diagnosis of GC [51]. In Japan and Korea, endoscopy-based population screening allows frequent detection of early gastric cancer (EGC), which can be a suitable candidate for conservative treatments such as endoscopic submucosal dissection [51]. EGC is defined, irrespectively of the tumor size, as a carcinoma invading the mucosa and/or submucosa with or without lymph node metastases [52]. The incidence of nodal metastases in EGC depends upon the size, depth of invasion in the gastric wall, and histological differentiation of the tumor [5355]. In detail, the incidence of nodal involvement is 0% for well-differentiated tumors of less than 2 cm in size and restricted to gastric mucosa, while it is higher than 30% for tumors showing infiltration in the submucosa, poor differentiation, and size larger than 2 cm [5355].

According to the macroscopic classification of Japanese Endoscopic Society, EGC is divided into Type I, which includes tumors with polypoid growth, Type II which comprises tumors with superficial growth, Type III which describes tumors with excavating growth, and Type IV which refers to tumors with infiltrative growth and lateral spreading. Then, Type II EGC is further subdivided into IIa (elevated), IIb (flat), and IIc (depressed) and, on microscopic viewpoint, the most common histological architecture found in EGC is well differentiated, tubular, and/or papillary pattern [56]. For this reason, it may be challenging at times to discriminate between well-differentiated adenocarcinoma and high grade dysplasia, especially in superficial specimens of gastric mucosa [56]. EGC has good prognosis, with 5-year survival rate around 90% for N0 tumors [57] and around 70–75% for N+ carcinomas [57].

The presence of lymph node metastases is the main factor conditioning the surgical procedure for the resection of EGC. Indeed, according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines [58], EGC without lymph node metastases can be a suitable candidate to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) [55, 59, 60]. The size, histological type, depth of invasion, and lymphatic or venous invasion of the primary tumor were evidenced as factors predictive of nodal metastases in EGC [6165]. With reference to molecular alterations, microsatellite instability (MSI), mutations in the p53 gene and overexpression of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and HER2 genes seem to have a prognostic role in EGC. In detail, high microsatellite instability (MSI-H), a form of genomic instability associated with defective DNA mismatch repair, was demonstrated in EGC with a frequency ranging between 8.2% and 37% [6567] and it was shown as an independent predictor of low frequency of lymph node metastases and long survival in this subset of tumors [65, 68]. On the other hand, mutation in the p53 gene, which is one of the most frequent genetic abnormalities observed in GC, was associated with nodal metastases in EGC [65]. Finally, overexpression of EGFR and HER2 genes was significantly correlated with disease recurrence and poor prognosis in patients affected by EGC [65, 69, 70]. As a matter of fact, patients with HER2-negative pN0 EGC have significantly higher 5-year overall survival (91.1%) compared to patients with HER2-positive (Figure 2, authors’ collection) pN0 EGC (81.8%) [60]. In addition, HER2 immunoexpression appears to be significantly associated with development of micrometastases in pN0 EGC [60, 71].

Figure 2: Intramucosal early gastric cancer with 3+ HER2 positivity; adjacent intestinal metaplasia present was unstained (original magnification, ×160; Mayer’s Haemalum nuclear counterstain).

4. HER2 in Advanced Gastric Cancer

According to the published literature, HER2 overexpression/amplification, assessed by immunohistochemistry and/or in situ hybridization, ranges between 7% and 34% in advanced GC [7278]. Of note, based on the results of an international randomized controlled trial (ToGA), patients with advanced gastric adenocarcinoma overexpressing HER2 are eligible for target treatment with Trastuzumab [22, 79]. Indeed a significant reduction of mortality rate was observed in patients with HER2 overexpressing advanced GC treated with combined chemotherapy and Trastuzumab [22, 79]. On the whole, HER2 positivity is significantly more frequent in gastroesophageal junction cancer (24–35%) compared to GC (9.5–21%) [73, 78, 80, 81]. Moreover, the rate of HER2 overexpression varies according to the histotype of GC [73, 7577, 80], with higher frequency evidenced in the intestinal histotype (81.6%–91%) compared to the diffuse or mixed (4%–7.9%) [77, 8285]. Of note, the pattern of HER2 immunoreactivity is frequently heterogeneous in intestinal GC, which showed intermingled HER2-positive and HER2-negative areas. On the other hand, a more uniform unreactive HER2 pattern was encountered in diffuse histotype. Interestingly, HER2 overexpression rate progressively increases moving from the poorly cohesive WHO histotype to the mitochondrion-rich adenocarcinoma (MRC), tubular adenocarcinoma, and hepatoid carcinoma (HAS) [74, 76] which has the highest frequency of HER2 positivity and the worst prognosis [74, 76]. HER2 overexpression is also significantly associated with high histological grade, high Ki-67 labeling index (LI), and advanced stage [78]; thus it represents an additional morphological parameter reflecting aggressiveness of GC [78]. The biological reasons for the peculiar association between HER2 overexpression and the histotype of GC have not been yet fully elucidated and additional investigation is required. However, a possible explanation for this phenomenon may reside in the relationship between e-cadherin and HER2 expression. Indeed HER2 amplification is inversely associated with e-cadherin mutations [75, 86], and e-cadherin mutations are frequent in diffuse gastric and lobular breast carcinoma and rare in intestinal and ductal breast cancer [73, 75].

HER2 overexpression/amplification is frequently heterogeneous in GC [46, 87, 88] compared to breast cancer, in which HER2 heterogeneity is uncommon [89, 90]. For this reason, several recommendations on methodology, interpretation, and quality control for HER2 testing in GC have been proposed, especially with regard to the assessment in bioptic specimens of surgically unresectable cases. In addition, criteria for the assessment of HER2 amplification in bioptic and surgical specimens of GC have been significantly modified from those routinely applied to breast carcinoma [91]. In particular, the guidelines for the assessment of HER2 status in GC state that the staining intensity (light, moderate, and strong) and distribution (complete, lateral, and basolateral) at cell membrane should be evaluated in at least 10% of neoplastic cells in surgical specimens and in a cluster of at least 5 tumor cells in the biopsy [77, 82, 87] (Table 1). This HER2 scoring system represents a reliable tool for the evaluation of HER2 status in GC biopsy and surgical specimen, and it results in good concordance between paired biopsy and surgical specimen of advanced GC, mainly if all the available specimens are tested [46, 77, 9296]. Nonetheless, a low rate of HER2 discordance has been reported between paired biotic and surgical samples of GC [97].

Table 1: Immunohistochemical criteria for HER2 scoring in neoplastic specimens of the stomach.

No guidelines are currently available on the number of tumor blocks to be tested for HER2 expression. However it was proposed that more than one (at least three) representative tumor blocks, obtained from different neoplastic areas, should be analyzed in order to overcome HER2 heterogeneity [82, 92, 98]. Moreover, it was suggested that at least 6 to 8 tumor fragments are required for adequate assessment in biopsies, mainly in patients who have low chance of being submitted to surgery [46, 77].

Recently, several studies addressed the issue of HER2 concordance between primary carcinoma and its metastases (Figures 3 and 4, authors’ collection). Indeed it was shown that HER2 status may differ between primary tumor and matched metastases in both breast and stomach cancers [99108]. Although a preliminary report did not show any significant changes in HER2 status in metastatic lesions compared to primary GC [84], more recent data demonstrated discordant HER2 status between primary carcinoma and synchronous or metachronous locoregional/distant metastases, with a mean rate of 7% and either positive or negative conversion [41, 99, 101, 104, 109113]. In addition, changes in HER2 status, consisting in either positive or negative conversion, were evidenced in a comparative analysis between paired primary GC and corresponding synchronous metastatic lymph nodes in patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy [101, 104, 108]. This latter fining may have relevant clinical impact [108]. Indeed, if HER2 expression is tested only in the primary GC, a percentage of patients with HER2-positive conversion in lymph node metastases may be excluded from targeted therapy [108]. Positive conversion may be related to the development of a HER2-positive subclone in metastatic lymph nodes as a result of disease progression [108]. On the other hand, negative conversion observed in metastatic deposits of patients who had not received any neoadjuvant treatments [108] cannot develop as the result of resistance to Trastuzumab therapy. Of note, discrepancy in HER2 status between primary tumor and paired nodal metastases was already highlighted in breast cancer [106, 107]. Although at present there is no indication of testing HER2 status in synchronous nodal metastases from GC, possible discordance in HER2 expression in metastatic tumors compared to primitive cancer is relevant for the therapeutic management and prognosis of the patients. Indeed further patients eligible for Trastuzumab-based therapy may be identified by assessing HER2 status in synchronous metastases from patients with HER2-negative primary GC.

Figure 3: (a) Concordant HER2 status in primary GC (original magnification, ×320; Mayer’s Haemalum nuclear counterstain) and (b) corresponding metastatic lymph node (original magnification, ×160; Mayer’s Haemalum nuclear counterstain).
Figure 4: (a) Positive HER2 conversion in metastasis (original magnification, ×160; Mayer’s Haemalum nuclear counterstain, ×160) in comparison to (b) negative primary GC (original magnification, ×120; Mayer’s Haemalum nuclear counterstain).

5. Conclusions

HER2 putative role in gastric carcinogenesis still needs investigation. The evidence of a higher rate of HER2 overexpression in gastric HG-IEN compared to LG-IEN suggests that HER2 may be involved in the early steps of gastric carcinogenesis. In accordance, GC showing CIN, frequent amplification of genes related to receptor tyrosine kinase RTK/RAS signaling such as HER2, and Lauren’s intestinal type has been recognized as a distinct molecular subtype of GC [19, 114].

Although HER2 has emerged as a new therapeutic target in GC, its role as a prognostic marker in this tumor is still controversial [115121]. Indeed, some studies demonstrated that HER2 overexpression is a poor prognostic factor in GC [122, 123], while others showed that it may be favorable or irrelevant for prognosis [85, 123, 124]. In view of the correlation between HER2 overexpression and the immunohistochemical subtype of gastric dysplasia, HER2 assessment in gastric dysplasia may be helpful in order to identify patients at increased risk of developing a specific type of cancer. In addition, in our opinion, HER2 testing can be used as a prognostic factor to predict the risk of poor outcome in EGC, since patients with HER2-negative pN0 EGC have significantly higher 5-year overall survival compared to patients with HER2-positive pN0 EGC [60].

In advanced GC, HER2 overexpression is significantly more frequent in tumors showing tubular histotype, high histological grade, advanced stage, and high Ki-67 LI, which suggests that it may represent an additional prognostic negative parameter. Finally, in view of the possible difference in HER2 status between primary GC and synchronous lymph node metastases, we suggest that HER2 status is routinely assessed not only in primary GC, but also in nodal and distant metastases, in order to identify possible candidates eligible for targeted Trastuzumab therapy.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

References

  1. R. De Angelis, M. Sant, M. P. Coleman et al., “Cancer survival in Europe 1999–2007 by country and age: results of EUROCARE—5-a population-based study,” The Lancet Oncology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 23–34, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  2. R. A. Caruso, E. Irato, G. Branca, G. Finocchiaro, F. Fedele, and A. Arnese, “Gastric adenocarcinoma incidence in the province of Messina (Insular Italy): a cancer registry study,” Oncology Letters, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 861–865, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. A. Ieni, G. Branca, A. Parisi et al., “Neutrophil-rich gastric carcinoma in the integrated cancer registry of eastern Sicily, Italy,” Anticancer Research, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 487–492, 2015. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. L. Rigoli and R. A. Caruso, “Mitochondrial DNA alterations in the progression of gastric carcinomas: unexplored issues and future research needs,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 20, no. 43, pp. 16159–16166, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. A. Barchielli, A. Amorosi, D. Balzi, E. Crocetti, and G. Nesi, “Long-term prognosis of gastric cancer in a European country: a population-based study in Florence (Italy). 10-year survival of cases diagnosed in 1985–1987,” European Journal of Cancer, vol. 37, no. 13, pp. 1674–1680, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. R. Inghelmann, E. Grande, S. Francisci et al., “Regional estimates of stomach cancer burden in Italy,” Tumori, vol. 93, no. 4, pp. 367–373, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. M. Castaing, F. Bella, and C. Buzzoni, “Incidence of stomach cancer is decreasing faster in the Centre-North of Italy,” Epidemiologia & Prevenzione, vol. 36, no. 2, p. 129, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  8. M. Vauhkonen, H. Vauhkonen, and P. Sipponen, “Pathology and molecular biology of gastric cancer,” Best Practice and Research: Clinical Gastroenterology, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 651–674, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. P. Correa, C. Cuello, and W. Haenszel, “The pathogenesis of gastric carcinoma—epidemiologic pathology of precursor lesions,” Leber Magen Darm, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 72–79, 1976. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. C. Cuello, P. Correa, W. Haenszel et al., “Gastric cancer in Colombia. I. Cancer risk and suspect environmental agents,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 57, no. 5, pp. 1015–1020, 1976. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. W. Haenszel, P. Correa, C. Cuello et al., “Gastric cancer in Colombia. II. Case-control epidemiologic study of precursor lesions,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 57, no. 5, pp. 1021–1026, 1976. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. P. Correa, W. Haenszel, C. Cuello et al., “Gastric precancerous process in a high risk population: cohort follow-up,” Cancer Research, vol. 50, no. 15, pp. 4737–4740, 1990. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. H. Ohata, S. Kitauchi, N. Yoshimura et al., “Progression of chronic atrophic gastritis associated with Helicobacter pylori infection increases risk of gastric cancer,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 109, no. 1, pp. 138–143, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. P. Correa, “Antioxidant vitamin supplementation and control of gastric cancer,” Nature Clinical Practice Oncology, vol. 4, no. 8, pp. 452–453, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. L. Zheng, L. Wang, J. Ajani, and K. Xie, “Molecular basis of gastric cancer development and progression,” Gastric Cancer, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 61–77, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. M. H. McLean and E. M. El-Omar, “Genetics of gastric cancer,” Nature Reviews Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 11, no. 11, pp. 664–674, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. C. Lengauer, K. W. Kinzler, and B. Vogelstein, “Genetic instabilities in human cancers,” Nature, vol. 396, no. 6762, pp. 643–649, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. P. Hudler, “Genetic aspects of gastric cancer instability,” The Scientific World Journal, vol. 2012, Article ID 761909, 10 pages, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network, “Comprehensive molecular characterization of gastric adenocarcinoma,” Nature, vol. 513, no. 7517, pp. 202–209, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  20. J. Czyzewska, K. Guzinska-Ustymowicz, and A. Kemona, “Correlation of c-erbB-2, EGF and EGFR expression with postoperative survival of patients with advanced carcinoma of the stomach,” Folia Histochemica et Cytobiologica, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 653–661, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. D. J. Slamon, B. Leyland-Jones, S. Shak et al., “Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against her2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 344, no. 11, pp. 783–792, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. Y. J. Bang, E. Van Cutsem, A. Feyereislova et al., “Trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for treatment of HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (ToGA): a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial,” The Lancet, vol. 376, no. 9742, pp. 687–697, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  23. R. Nishimura, K.-I. Mukaisho, H. Yamamoto et al., “Precursor-derived versus de-novo carcinogenesis depends on lineage-specific mucin phenotypes of intramucosal gland-forming gastric neoplasms,” Histopathology, vol. 63, no. 5, pp. 616–629, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. R. Kushima, M. Vieth, F. Borchard, M. Stolte, K.-I. Mukaisho, and T. Hattori, “Gastric-type well-differentiated adenocarcinoma and pyloric gland adenoma of the stomach,” Gastric Cancer, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 177–184, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. S. Carl-McGrath, M. Ebert, and C. Röcken, “Gastric adenocarcinoma: epidemiology, pathology and pathogenesis,” Cancer Therapy, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 877–894, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  26. M. Rugge, P. Correa, M. F. Dixon et al., “Gastric dysplasia: the Padova International classification,” The American Journal of Surgical Pathology, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 167–176, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. R. J. Schlemper, R. H. Riddell, Y. Kato et al., “The Vienna classification of gastrointestinal epithelial neoplasia,” Gut, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 251–255, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. M. Rugge, M. de Boni, G. Pennelli et al., “Gastritis OLGA-staging and gastric cancer risk: a twelve-year clinico-pathological follow-up study,” Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 1104–1111, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. M. Rugge, F. Farinati, R. Baffa et al., “Gastric epithelial dysplasia in the natural history of gastric cancer: a multicenter prospective follow-up study. Interdisciplinary Group on Gastric Epithelial Dysplasia,” Gastroenterology, vol. 107, no. 5, pp. 1288–1296, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. M. Cassaro, M. Rugge, C. Tieppo et al., “Indefinite for non-invasive neoplasia lesions in gastric intestinal metaplasia: the immunophenotype,” Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 615–621, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. P. Correa, M. B. Piazuelo, and K. T. Wilson, “Pathology of gastric intestinal metaplasia: clinical implications,” The American Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 493–498, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. X. Xu, L. Feng, Y. Liu et al., “Differential gene expression profiling of gastric intraepithelial neoplasia and early-stage adenocarcinoma,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 20, no. 47, pp. 17883–17893, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. G. Testino, “Gastric precancerous changes: carcinogenesis, clinical behaviour immunophenotype study and surveillance,” Panminerva Medica, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 109–118, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. L.-L. Lin, H.-C. Huang, and H.-F. Juan, “Discovery of biomarkers for gastric cancer: a proteomics approach,” Journal of Proteomics, vol. 75, no. 11, pp. 3081–3097, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. Z.-H. Zheng, X.-J. Sun, M.-C. Ma, D.-M. Hao, Y.-H. Liu, and K.-L. Sun, “Studies of promoter methylation status and protein expression of E-cadherin gene in associated progression stages of gastric cancer,” Yichuan Xuebao, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 103–108, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. E. Rossi, S. Grisanti, V. Villanacci et al., “HER-2 overexpression/amplification in Barrett's oesophagus predicts early transition from dysplasia to adenocarcinoma: a clinico-pathologic study,” Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 3826–3833, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. D. T. Merrick, J. Kittelson, R. Winterhalder et al., “Analysis of c-ErbB1/epidermal growth factor receptor and c-ErbB2/HER-2 expression in bronchial dysplasia: evaluation of potential targets for chemoprevention of lung cancer,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 12, no. 7, part 1, pp. 2281–2288, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. M. J. van de Vijver, J. L. Peterse, W. J. Mooi et al., “Neu-protein overexpression in breast cancer. Association with comedo-type ductal carcinoma in situ and limited prognostic value in stage II breast cancer,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 319, no. 19, pp. 1239–1245, 1988. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. R. F. Lodato, H. C. Maguire Jr., M. I. Greene, D. B. Weiner, and V. A. LiVolsi, “Immunohistochemical evaluation of c-erbB-2 oncogene expression in ductal carcinoma in situ and atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast,” Modern Pathology, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 449–454, 1990. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. M. Van Bockstal, K. Lambein, H. Denys et al., “Histopathological characterization of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast according to HER2 amplification status and molecular subtype,” Virchows Archiv, vol. 465, no. 3, pp. 275–289, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. N. Fusco, E. G. Rocco, C. Del Conte et al., “HER2 in gastric cancer: a digital image analysis in pre-neoplastic, primary and metastatic lesions,” Modern Pathology, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 816–824, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. M. Fassan, L. Mastracci, F. Grillo et al., “Early HER2 dysregulation in gastric and oesophageal carcinogenesis,” Histopathology, vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 769–776, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. V. Villanacci, E. Rossi, S. Grisanti et al., “Targeted therapy with trastuzumab in dysplasia and adenocarcinoma arising in Barrett's esophagus: a translational approach,” Minerva Gastroenterologica e Dietologica, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 347–353, 2008. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. E. Rossi, V. Villanacci, G. Bassotti et al., “TOPOIIalpha and HER-2/neu overexpression/amplification in Barrett's oesophagus, dysplasia and adenocarcinoma,” Histopathology, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 81–89, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. Y. Hu, S. Bandla, T. E. Godfrey et al., “HER2 amplification, overexpression and score criteria in esophageal adenocarcinoma,” Modern Pathology, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 899–907, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. S. Lee, W. B. de Boer, S. Fermoyle, M. Platten, and M. P. Kumarasinghe, “Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in gastric carcinoma: issues related to heterogeneity in biopsies and resections,” Histopathology, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 832–840, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. A. M. M. F. Nogueira, J. C. Machado, F. Carneiro, C. A. Reis, P. Gött, and M. Sobrinho-Simões, “Patterns of expression of trefoil peptides and mucins in gastric polyps with and without malignant transformation,” Journal of Pathology, vol. 187, no. 5, pp. 541–548, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. D. Y. Park, A. Srivastava, G. H. Kim et al., “Adenomatous and foveolar gastric dysplasia: distinct patterns of mucin expression and background intestinal metaplasia,” The American Journal of Surgical Pathology, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 524–533, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. D. Y. Park, A. Srivastava, G. H. Kim et al., “CDX2 expression in the intestinal-type gastric epithelial neoplasia: frequency and significance,” Modern Pathology, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 54–61, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. P. Valente, M. Garrido, I. Gullo et al., “Epithelial dysplasia of the stomach with gastric immunophenotype shows features of biological aggressiveness,” Gastric Cancer, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. J. H. Kang, Y. J. Lim, J. H. Kang et al., “Prevalence of precancerous conditions and gastric cancer based upon the national cancer screening program in Korea for 7 years, single center experience,” Gastroenterology Research and Practice, vol. 2015, Article ID 571965, 5 pages, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. B. Hu, N. El Hajj, S. Sittler et al., “Gastric cancer: classification, histology and application of molecular pathology,” Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 251–261, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  53. C. Li, S. Kim, J. F. Lai et al., “Risk factors for lymph node metastasis in undifferentiated early gastric cancer,” Annals of Surgical Oncology, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 764–769, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. T. Hirasawa, T. Gotoda, S. Miyata et al., “Incidence of lymph node metastasis and the feasibility of endoscopic resection for undifferentiated-type early gastric cancer,” Gastric Cancer, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 148–152, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. G. P. B. Neto, E. G. dos Santos, F. C. Victer, and C. E. D. S. Carvalho, “Lymph node metastasis in early gastric cancer,” Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 11–17, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. H. M. Kim, K. H. Pak, M. J. Chung et al., “Early gastric cancer of signet ring cell carcinoma is more amenable to endoscopic treatment than is early gastric cancer of poorly differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma in select tumor conditions,” Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 3087–3093, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. Y. Isobe, A. Nashimoto, K. Akazawa et al., “Gastric cancer treatment in Japan: 2008 annual report of the JGCA nationwide registry,” Gastric Cancer, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 301–316, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. J. A. Ajani, J. S. Barthel, D. J. Bentrem et al., NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN GuidelinesTM). Gastric Cancer (Including Cancer in the Proximal 5 cm of the Stomach), Version 2, 2011.
  59. A. R. Novotny and C. Schuhmacher, “Predicting lymph node metastases in early gastric cancer: radical resection or organ-sparing therapy?” Gastric Cancer, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 131–133, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. Y. Yan, L. Lu, C. Liu, W. Li, T. Liu, and W. Fu, “HER2/neu over-expression predicts poor outcome in early gastric cancer without lymph node metastasis,” Clinics and Research in Hepatology and Gastroenterology, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 121–126, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. T. Boku, Y. Nakane, T. Okusa et al., “Strategy for lymphadenectomy of gastric cancer,” Surgery, vol. 105, no. 5, pp. 585–592, 1989. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. S. Guadagni, P. I. Reed, B. J. Johnston et al., “Early gastric cancer: follow-up after gastrectomy in 159 patients,” British Journal of Surgery, vol. 80, no. 3, pp. 325–328, 1993. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. C.-Y. Wu, J.-T. Chen, G.-H. Chen, and H.-Z. Yeh, “Lymph node metastasis in early gastric cancer: a clinicopathological analysis,” Hepato-Gastroenterology, vol. 49, no. 47, pp. 1465–1468, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. A. Fujimoto, Y. Ishikawa, Y. Akishima-Fukasawa et al., “Significance of lymphatic invasion on regional lymph node metastasis in early gastric cancer using LYVE-1 immunohistochemical analysis,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 127, no. 1, pp. 82–88, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. E. H. Jin, D. H. Lee, S.-A. Jung et al., “Clinicopathologic factors and molecular markers related to lymph node metastasis in early gastric cancer,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 563–569, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. M. Wu, S. Semba, N. Oue, N. Ikehara, W. Yasui, and H. Yokozaki, “BRAF/K-ras mutation, microsatellite instability, and promoter hypermethylation of hMLH1/MGMT in human gastric carcinomas,” Gastric Cancer, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 246–253, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  67. M. S. Hyung, S. C. Yeon, H. J. Sun et al., “Clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes of gastric cancers with the MSI-H phenotype,” Journal of Surgical Oncology, vol. 99, no. 3, pp. 143–147, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. G. Tamura, K. Sakata, S. Nishizuka et al., “Allelotype of adenoma and differentiated adenocarcinoma of the stomach,” Journal of Pathology, vol. 180, no. 4, pp. 371–377, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. G. Galizia, E. Lieto, M. Orditura et al., “Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression is associated with a worse prognosis in gastric cancer patients undergoing curative surgery,” World Journal of Surgery, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 1458–1468, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  70. C. Chen, J.-M. Yang, T.-T. Hu et al., “Prognostic role of human epidermal growth factor receptor in gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Archives of Medical Research, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 380–389, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  71. L. Cao, X. Hu, Y. Zhang, and G. Huang, “Adverse prognosis of clustered-cell versus single-cell micrometastases in pN0 early gastric cancer,” Journal of Surgical Oncology, vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 53–56, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  72. T. Takehana, K. Kunitomo, K. Kono et al., “Status of c-erbB-2 in gastric adenocarcinoma: a comparative study of immunohistochemistry, fluorescence in situ hybridization and enzyme-linked immuno-sorbent assay,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 98, no. 6, pp. 833–837, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  73. M. Tanner, M. Hollmén, T. T. Junttila et al., “Amplification of HER-2 in gastric carcinoma: association with Topoisomerase IIalpha gene amplification, intestinal type, poor prognosis and sensitivity to trastuzumab,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 273–278, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  74. D. I. Park, J. W. Yun, J. H. Park et al., “HER-2/neu amplification is an independent prognostic factor in gastric cancer,” Digestive Diseases and Sciences, vol. 51, no. 8, pp. 1371–1379, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  75. C. Gravalos and A. Jimeno, “HER2 in gastric cancer: a new prognostic factor and a novel therapeutic target,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 1523–1529, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  76. G. Giuffrè, A. Ieni, V. Barresi, R. A. Caruso, and G. Tuccari, “HER2 status in unusual histological variants of gastric adenocarcinomas,” Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 237–241, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  77. J. Rüschoff, W. Hanna, M. Bilous et al., “HER2 testing in gastric cancer: a practical approach,” Modern Pathology, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 637–650, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  78. A. Ieni, V. Barresi, G. Giuffrè et al., “HER2 status in advanced gastric carcinoma: a retrospective multicentric analysis from Sicily,” Oncology Letters, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 1591–1594, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  79. L. Shan, J. Ying, and N. Lu, “HER2 expression and relevant clinicopathological features in gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma in a Chinese population,” Diagnostic Pathology, vol. 8, no. 1, article 76, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  80. K. Hede, “Gastric cancer: trastuzumab trial results spur search for other targets,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 101, no. 19, pp. 1306–1307, 2009. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  81. C. B. Moelans, A. N. Milne, F. H. Morsink, G. J. A. Offerhaus, and P. J. Van Diest, “Low frequency of HER2 amplification and overexpression in early onset gastric cancer,” Cellular Oncology, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 89–95, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  82. M. Hofmann, O. Stoss, D. Shi et al., “Assessment of a HER2 scoring system for gastric cancer: results from a validation study,” Histopathology, vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 797–805, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  83. J. D. Barros-Silva, D. Leitão, L. Afonso et al., “Association of ERBB2 gene status with histopathological parameters and disease-specific survival in gastric carcinoma patients,” British Journal of Cancer, vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 487–493, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  84. A. H. Marx, L. Tharun, J. Muth et al., “HER-2 amplification is highly homogenous in gastric cancer,” Human Pathology, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 769–777, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  85. H. Grabsch, S. Sivakumar, S. Gray, H. E. Gabbert, and W. Müller, “HER2 expression in gastric cancer: rare, heterogeneous and of no prognostic value—conclusions from 924 cases of two independent series,” Cellular Oncology, vol. 32, no. 1-2, pp. 57–65, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  86. G. Berx, F. Nollet, and F. van Roy, “Dysregulation of the E-cadherin/catenin complex by irreversible mutations in human carcinomas,” Cell Adhesion and Communication, vol. 6, no. 2-3, pp. 171–184, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  87. J. Rüschoff, M. Dietel, G. Baretton et al., “HER2 diagnostics in gastric cancer-guideline validation and development of standardized immunohistochemical testing,” Virchows Archiv, vol. 457, no. 3, pp. 299–307, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  88. J. M. S. Bartlett, J. Starczynski, N. Atkey et al., “HER2 testing in the UK: recommendations for breast and gastric in-situ hybridisation methods,” Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 649–653, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  89. P. H. Cottu, J. Asselah, M. Lae et al., “Intratumoral heterogeneity of HER2/neu expression and its consequences for the management of advanced breast cancer,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 595–597, 2008. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  90. M. Brunelli, E. Manfrin, G. Martignoni et al., “Genotypic intratumoral heterogeneity in breast carcinoma with HER2/fieif emplification wvaluation according to ASCO/CAP criteria,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 131, no. 5, pp. 678–682, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  91. L. Albarello, L. Pecciarini, and C. Doglioni, “HER2 testing in gastric cancer,” Advances in Anatomic Pathology, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 53–59, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  92. M. A. Kim, H.-J. Lee, H.-K. Yang, Y.-J. Bang, and W. H. Kim, “Heterogeneous amplification of ERBB2 in primary lesions is responsible for the discordant ERBB2 status of primary and metastatic lesions in gastric carcinoma,” Histopathology, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 822–831, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  93. B. Yan, E. X. Yau, S. N. Choo et al., “Dual-colour HER2/Chromosome 17 chromogenic in situ hybridisation assay enables accurate assessment of HER2 genomic status in gastric cancer and has potential utility in HER2 testing of biopsy samples,” Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 64, no. 10, pp. 880–883, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  94. J. Yang, H. Luo, Y. Li et al., “Intratumoral heterogeneity determines discordant results of diagnostic tests for human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) 2 in gastric cancer specimens,” Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 221–228, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  95. M. Pirrelli, M. L. Caruso, M. Di Maggio, R. Armentano, and A. M. Valentini, “Are biopsy specimens predictive of HER2 status in gastric cancer patients?” Digestive Diseases and Sciences, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 397–404, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  96. T. Wang, E. T. Hsieh, P. Henry, W. Hanna, C. J. Streutker, and A. Grin, “Matched biopsy and resection specimens of gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma show high concordance in HER2 status,” Human Pathology, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 970–975, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  97. S.-C. Huang, K.-F. Ng, S.-E. Lee, K.-H. Chen, T.-S. Yeh, and T.-C. Chen, “HER2 testing in paired biopsy and excision specimens of gastric cancer: the reliability of the scoring system and the clinicopathological factors relevant to discordance,” Gastric Cancer, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  98. S. Asioli, F. Maletta, L. V. di Cantogno et al., “Approaching heterogeneity of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 in surgical specimens of gastric cancer,” Human Pathology, vol. 43, no. 11, pp. 2070–2079, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  99. J. H. Kim, M. A. Kim, H. S. Lee, and W. H. Kim, “Comparative analysis of protein expressions in primary and metastatic gastric carcinomas,” Human Pathology, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 314–322, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  100. S. J. Aitken, J. S. Thomas, S. P. Langdon, D. J. Harrison, and D. Faratian, “Quantitative analysis of changes in ER, PR and HER2 expression in primary breast cancer and paired nodal metastases,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 1254–1261, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  101. C. Bozzetti, F. V. Negri, C. A. Lagrasta et al., “Comparison of HER2 status in primary and paired metastatic sites of gastric carcinoma,” British Journal of Cancer, vol. 104, no. 9, pp. 1372–1376, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  102. A. Chan, A. Morey, B. Brown, D. Hastrich, P. Willsher, and D. Ingram, “A retrospective study investigating the rate of HER2 discordance between primary breast carcinoma and locoregional or metastatic disease,” BMC Cancer, vol. 12, article 555, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  103. M. V. Dieci, E. Barbieri, F. Piacentini et al., “Discordance in receptor status between primary and recurrent breast cancer has a prognostic impact: a single-institution analysis,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 24, no. 1, Article ID mds248, pp. 101–108, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  104. M. Kochi, M. Fujii, S. Masuda et al., “Differing deregulation of HER2 in primary gastric cancer and synchronous related metastatic lymph nodes,” Diagnostic Pathology, vol. 8, no. 1, article 191, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  105. G. Aurilio, D. Disalvatore, G. Pruneri et al., “A meta-analysis of oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 discordance between primary breast cancer and metastases,” European Journal of Cancer, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 277–289, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  106. A. Ieni, V. Barresi, G. Giuffrè et al., “Letter to the Editor regarding the paper by Aurilio et al., a meta-analysis of oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 discordance between primary breast cancer and metastases,” European Journal of Cancer, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 1035–1037, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  107. A. Ieni, V. Barresi, R. Caltabiano et al., “Discordance rate of HER2 status in primary breast carcinomas versus synchronous axillary lymph node metastases: a multicenter retrospective investigation,” OncoTargets and Therapy, vol. 7, pp. 1267–1272, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  108. A. Ieni, V. Barresi, R. Caltabiano et al., “Discordance rate of HER2 status in primary gastric carcinomas and synchronous lymph node metastases: a multicenter retrospective analysis,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 15, no. 12, pp. 22331–22341, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  109. D. Tsapralis, I. Panayiotides, G. Peros, T. Liakakos, and E. Karamitopoulou, “Human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 gene amplification in gastric cancer using tissue microarray technology,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 150–155, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  110. E. Yoon Cho, K. Park, I. Do et al., “Heterogeneity of ERBB2 in gastric carcinomas: a study of tissue microarray and matched primary and metastatic carcinomas,” Modern Pathology, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 677–684, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  111. M. Fassan, M. Pizzi, S. Realdon et al., “The HER2-miR125a5p/miR125b loop in gastric and esophageal carcinogenesis,” Human Pathology, vol. 44, no. 9, pp. 1804–1810, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  112. Y. Geng, X. Chen, J. Qiu et al., “Human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 expression in primary and metastatic gastric cancer,” International Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 303–311, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  113. Z. Peng, J. Zou, X. Zhang et al., “HER2 discordance between paired primary gastric cancer and metastasis: a meta-analysis,” Chinese Journal of Cancer Research, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 163–171, 2015. View at Google Scholar
  114. P. Tan, “Gastric cancer—a convergence of genomic heterogeneity,” Translational Gastrointestinal Cancer, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 118–122, 2015. View at Google Scholar
  115. H.-Z. Dang, Y. Yu, and S.-C. Jiao, “Prognosis of HER2 over-expressing gastric cancer patients with liver metastasis,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 18, no. 19, pp. 2402–2407, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  116. C. Gómez-Martin, E. Garralda, M. J. Echarri et al., “HER2/neu testing for anti-HER2-based therapies in patients with unresectable and/or metastatic gastric cancer,” Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 65, no. 8, pp. 751–757, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  117. Y. Y. Janjigian, D. Werner, C. Pauligk et al., “Prognosis of metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer by HER2 status: a European and USA International collaborative analysis,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 2656–2662, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  118. J. T. Jørgensen and M. Hersom, “HER2 as a prognostic marker in gastric cancer—a systematic analysis of data from the literature,” Journal of Cancer, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 137–144, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  119. Y. Kataoka, H. Okabe, A. Yoshizawa et al., “HER2 expression and its clinicopathological features in resectable gastric cancer,” Gastric Cancer, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 84–93, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  120. J. W. Kim, S.-A. Im, M. Kim et al., “The prognostic significance of HER2 positivity for advanced gastric cancer patients undergoing first-line modified FOLFOX-6 regimen,” Anticancer Research, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 1547–1553, 2012. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  121. K. Shitara, Y. Yatabe, K. Matsuo et al., “Prognosis of patients with advanced gastric cancer by HER2 status and trastuzumab treatment,” Gastric Cancer, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 261–267, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  122. H. Allgayer, R. Babic, K. U. Gruetzner, A. Tarabichi, F. W. Schildberg, and M. M. Heiss, “c-erbB-2 is of independent prognostic relevance in gastric cancer and is associated with the expression of tumor-associated protease systems,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 18, no. 11, pp. 2201–2209, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  123. N. Fuse, Y. Kuboki, T. Kuwata et al., “Prognostic impact of HER2, EGFR, and c-MET status on overall survival of advanced gastric cancer patients,” Gastric Cancer, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  124. J. Matsubara, YasuhideYamada, Y. Hirashima et al., “Impact of insulin-like growth factor type 1 receptor, epidermal growth factor receptor, and HER2 expressions on outcomes of patients with gastric cancer,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 3022–3029, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus