Gynecologic Biomarker Reporting
ER, PgR, HER2 (dual-pathway), MMR, p53, PD-L1, and FOLR1 — seven independent modules plus a combined final report.
Free with an accountLog in to calculate. You can explore the inputs and reference material below; results need a free student account.
Educational and decision-support tool only. Does not replace the current CAP protocol, ASCO/CAP guidelines, NCCN guidelines, molecular confirmation testing, or professional pathologist judgment. HER2 eligibility criteria for targeted therapy are evolving — verify current FDA/regulatory approval status and clinical trial context before treatment decisions.
Reference
Table 1 — ER / PgR reporting
Percentage may be visually estimated or quantitated (percentage of positive cells in the entire section). Significant regional variation should be reported. Staining intensity (weak to strong nuclear positivity) should also be reported — intensity can be affected by protein amount, antibody used, and antigen retrieval; most cancers show heterogeneous immunoreactivity.
| Result | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Positive | Immunoreactive tumor cells present (≥1%) showing nuclear staining. |
| Negative | <1% immunoreactive tumor cells present. |
Table 2 — HER2 IHC for Trastuzumab eligibility (NCT01367002 criteria)
HER2 staining in endometrial carcinoma is often lateral or basolateral and spares the apical portion of tumor cells — unlike the pattern typically seen in breast carcinoma. Heterogeneous staining (≥2-degree intensity difference in >5% of tumor) is frequently seen.
| Result | Criteria |
|---|---|
| 0 (Negative) | No staining observed. |
| 1+ (Negative) | Incomplete membrane staining, faint/barely perceptible, in any proportion of cells; or weak complete staining in <10% of tumor cells. |
| 2+ (Equivocal) | Intense complete or basolateral/lateral staining in ≤30% of tumor cells; or weak-to-moderate staining in ≥10% of tumor cells. Must reflex ISH (same specimen). |
| 3+ (Positive) | Intense complete or basolateral/lateral staining in >30% of tumor cells. |
Table 3 — HER2 IHC for Trastuzumab-Deruxtecan (T-DXd) eligibility (DESTINY-PanTumor02 criteria, gastric-cancer-based algorithm)
FISH is not indicated for this pathway. The DESTINY-PanTumor02 trial was based solely on HER2 IHC status and did not include FISH results for 2+ cases.
Eligibility nuance. The trial enrolled tumors with 3+ or 2+ HER2 IHC scores. The FDA's April 2024 tumor-agnostic accelerated approval for T-DXd is specifically for 3+ HER2 IHC expression. Reporting low levels of HER2 expression in gynecologic tumors is not currently required (unlike some breast cancer contexts) given limited gynecologic-specific data to date.
| Result | Surgical specimen | Biopsy specimen |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No staining, or membrane staining in <10% of cells. | No staining in any tumor cells. |
| 1+ | Faint/barely perceptible incomplete membrane staining in ≥10% of cells. | Tumor cell cluster (≥5 cells) with faint/barely perceptible staining, irrespective of % positive. |
| 2+ | Weak-to-moderate complete, basolateral, or lateral membrane staining in ≥10% of cells. | Cluster with weak-to-moderate complete/basolateral/lateral staining, irrespective of % positive. |
| 3+ | Strong complete, basolateral, or lateral membrane staining in ≥10% of cells. | Cluster with strong complete/basolateral/lateral staining, irrespective of % positive. |
Table 4 — HER2 dual-probe FISH for Trastuzumab eligibility
Count signals in ≥20 contiguous tumor cells, at the site of highest IHC protein expression. Heterogeneity (cluster amplification in groups of ≥20 cells, or mosaic/isolated amplified cells) should be reported when present.
| Result | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Negative | FISH HER2/CEP17 ratio <2.0, and average HER2 copy number <6 per nucleus. |
| Positive | FISH HER2/CEP17 ratio ≥2.0; or ratio <2.0 with average HER2 copy number ≥6 per nucleus. |
Mismatch repair (MMR) IHC
Reported as intact expression, loss of expression, or subclonal loss of expression, for each of MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, MSH6 (or PMS2/MSH6 only in the 2-antibody algorithm). MMR proteins work as dimers: MLH1 loss leads to loss of MLH1 and PMS2; MSH2 loss leads to loss of MSH2 and MSH6.
Loss should only be reported if internal control cells are positive.
Subclonal loss (discrete areas of complete loss adjacent to retained expression) should not be regarded as intact — distinguish from patchy staining, which can occur with intact expression.
Aberrant patterns (cytoplasmic, nucleolar, or punctate nuclear staining) should not be interpreted as intact.
Loss of MLH1/PMS2 → reflex MLH1 promoter methylation testing. Methylated → sporadic, germline testing generally not indicated. Unmethylated → suggests Lynch syndrome, germline MLH1 testing indicated.
Loss of MSH2/MSH6, or isolated loss of MSH6 or PMS2 → high probability of Lynch syndrome; genetic counseling should be considered.
Table 5 — p53 IHC
Serves as a surrogate for TP53 mutation status; 4% of high-grade serous carcinomas show a wild-type IHC pattern despite harboring a loss-of-function TP53 mutation. Subclonal abnormal pattern (up to 21% of endometrial carcinomas) often suggests a secondary mutational event with MMR-deficiency or POLE mutation, or may indicate a mixed carcinoma (correlate with morphology).
Ovarian mucinous tumors may show a "terminal differentiation" pattern — basal overexpression sparing superficial areas. p53 IHC accuracy can be affected by antigen retrieval, archival tissue, fixation quality, and interlaboratory protocol differences (D07 clone showed best performance in one study); ambiguous cases may warrant testing both biopsy and hysterectomy specimens, with TP53 sequencing considered.
Vulvar lesions have their own separate interpretation guidance in the CAP Vulvar Carcinoma protocol.
| Result | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Wild-type | Nuclear staining of varying intensity, admixed with negative nuclei. |
| Abnormal (overexpression) | Diffuse, strong nuclear positivity in ≥80% of tumor cells. |
| Abnormal (null-type) | Complete absence of nuclear and cytoplasmic reactivity in tumor cells, with a satisfactory internal positive control. |
| Abnormal (cytoplasmic) | Cytoplasmic staining, which may be accompanied by nuclear reactivity. |
| Subclonal abnormal | Any of the abnormal patterns above, present in only a subset of tumor cells. |
Table 6 — PD-L1 IHC (Combined Positive Score)
CPS = (PD-L1-positive tumor cells + tumor-associated immune cells) ÷ total viable tumor cells × 100, capped at 100. Requires ≥100 viable tumor cells; evaluate the entire tumor area (not hot spots) at 20× objective. Count tumor cells with any-intensity membrane staining and tumor-associated immune cells (intra- or peritumoral, including lymphoid aggregates) with membrane or cytoplasmic staining; exclude stromal cells, neutrophils, and plasma cells.
FDA-approved (2018) for pembrolizumab eligibility in PD-L1-expressing recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer (22C3 pharmDx assay). Up to 82% of cervical carcinomas are CPS≥1. For vulvar cancer, up to 50% express PD-L1; no current FDA approval, but NCCN and SITC guidelines list pembrolizumab as a second-line option for PD-L1-expressing or MMR-deficient/MSI-H disease. For endometrial cancer, PD-L1 testing is not required — eligibility is determined by MMR/MSI status; PD-L1 can be considered when MMR/MSI is normal.
| Result | Criteria |
|---|---|
| PD-L1 expression | CPS ≥1. |
| No PD-L1 expression | CPS <1. |
Table 7 — Folate Receptor Alpha (FOLR1) IHC
Companion diagnostic (VENTANA FOLR1 [FOLR-2.1] RxDx Assay) for mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV) eligibility in FOLR1-positive platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer (FDA accelerated approval, November 2022). Normal fallopian tube serves as both positive and negative control. Re-reading by an additional pathologist is recommended for both positive and negative results.
| Result | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Positive (test tissue) | ≥75% of viable tumor cells with moderate-to-strong membrane staining. |
| Negative (test tissue) | <75% with moderate-to-strong staining; or weak staining in any proportion; or no staining. |
| Not evaluable | Significant artifacts precluding interpretation. |
| Control acceptable | Predominantly moderate circumferential membrane staining in normal fallopian tube epithelium (excluding apical staining of the first luminal cell layer), with absence of stromal staining. |
| Control not acceptable | Absence of staining; predominantly weak or strong circumferential staining; and/or non-specific background staining precluding interpretation. |
Sources
Allison KH, Hammond MEH, Dowsett M, et al. Estrogen and progesterone receptor testing in breast cancer: ASCO/CAP guideline update. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2020;144(5):545-563.
Fader AN, Roque DM, Siegel E, et al. Randomized phase II trial of carboplatin-paclitaxel ± trastuzumab in uterine serous carcinomas overexpressing HER2/neu (NCT01367002). J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(20):2044-2051.
Meric-Bernstam F, Makker V, Oaknin A, et al. Efficacy and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan in HER2-expressing solid tumors: DESTINY-PanTumor02. J Clin Oncol. 2024;42(1):47-58.
Buza N. HER2 testing and reporting in endometrial serous carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2021;40(1):17-23.
NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology — Uterine Neoplasms, Version 2/2024.
College of American Pathologists. Templates for gynecologic biomarker reporting (document Gynecologic.Bmk_1.3.0.0.REL_CAPCP).
Buza N. Immunohistochemistry in gynecologic carcinomas: practical update based on the 2020 WHO classification of tumors. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2022;39(1):58-77.
Köbel M, Kang EY. The many uses of p53 immunohistochemistry in gynecologic pathology. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2021;40(1):32-40.
Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network; Kandoth C, Schultz N, Cherniack AD, et al. Integrated genomic characterization of endometrial carcinoma. Nature. 2013;497(7447):67-73.
Chung HC, Ros W, Delord JP, et al. Efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in previously treated advanced cervical cancer: KEYNOTE-158. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(17):1470-1478.
Mills AM, Bennett JA, Banet N, et al. Interobserver agreement on PD-L1 CPS interpretation among gynecologic pathologists. Am J Surg Pathol. 2023;47(8):889-896.