Cargando…
Comparison of PD‐L1 detection assays and corresponding significance in evaluation of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma
The expression of programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD‐L1) is a biomarker for immunotherapy, but approved detection method is absent in diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Here, we performed three methods including immunohistochemistry (IHC) (clone SP263 and SP142), RNAscope, and fluorescence in si...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6639200/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31150165 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2316 |
_version_ | 1783436418029191168 |
---|---|
author | Huang, Sixia Nong, Lin Liang, Li Zheng, Yalin Wang, Wei Liu, Jumei Li, Dong Li, Xin Wang, Ying Zhang, Bo Li, Ting |
author_facet | Huang, Sixia Nong, Lin Liang, Li Zheng, Yalin Wang, Wei Liu, Jumei Li, Dong Li, Xin Wang, Ying Zhang, Bo Li, Ting |
author_sort | Huang, Sixia |
collection | PubMed |
description | The expression of programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD‐L1) is a biomarker for immunotherapy, but approved detection method is absent in diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Here, we performed three methods including immunohistochemistry (IHC) (clone SP263 and SP142), RNAscope, and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to evaluate PD‐L1 status on a cohort of DLBCL including 94 of DLBCL‐NOS, 25 of primary mediastinal large B‐cell lymphoma (PMBCL) and 7 of double‐hit lymphoma (DHL). SP263 with 25% for immune cell (IC) or combined cell and SP142 with 10% for tumor cell (TC), 20% for both of IC and combined cell were proved to have corresponding survival prognostic. Combined(+) showed comparable prognostic value with TC(+) and IC(+). SP263 and SP142 showed strong concordance (k = 0.788) with combined(+) rates of 33.3% (42/126) and 34.9% (44/126), respectively. In DLBCL‐NOS, TC(+) by SP263 preferred to non‐GCB and immunoblastic variant DLBCL‐NOS (P = 0.029 and P = 0.004). Combined(+) (SP263 and SP142) were associated with more than one extranodal site involved (P = 0.006, P = 0.042), higher ECOG PS scores (P = 0.001, P < 0.001), high IPI risk (P = 0.012, P = 0.005), and poor treatment response (P = 0.095, P = 0.002). IC(+) by SP263 and SP142 were both independent risk factors (P = 0.027, P = 0.037). 9p24.1 locus amplification and gain were identified in 4.3% and 7.6% DLBCL‐NOS and indicated shorter overall survival (P = 0.004). Positive rate of PD‐L1 by RNAscope was 36.5%, while no clinical significance shown. PD‐L1 positive rates were all higher in PMBCL and DHL than in DLBCL‐NOS by SP263, SP142, RNAscope, and FISH (P = 0.001, P < 0.001, P = 0.005 and P < 0.001, respectively). In conclusion, combined PD‐L1 expression by IHC was potentially reliable and convenient as a predicting biomarker. SP263 staining was easier to evaluate and recognized more PD‐L1‐stained cells, but SP142 presented a better prognostic indicator. FISH and RNAscope could be used as supplementary assays. PMBCL itself was a sensitive cohort for immunotherapy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6639200 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66392002019-07-29 Comparison of PD‐L1 detection assays and corresponding significance in evaluation of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma Huang, Sixia Nong, Lin Liang, Li Zheng, Yalin Wang, Wei Liu, Jumei Li, Dong Li, Xin Wang, Ying Zhang, Bo Li, Ting Cancer Med Clinical Cancer Research The expression of programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD‐L1) is a biomarker for immunotherapy, but approved detection method is absent in diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Here, we performed three methods including immunohistochemistry (IHC) (clone SP263 and SP142), RNAscope, and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to evaluate PD‐L1 status on a cohort of DLBCL including 94 of DLBCL‐NOS, 25 of primary mediastinal large B‐cell lymphoma (PMBCL) and 7 of double‐hit lymphoma (DHL). SP263 with 25% for immune cell (IC) or combined cell and SP142 with 10% for tumor cell (TC), 20% for both of IC and combined cell were proved to have corresponding survival prognostic. Combined(+) showed comparable prognostic value with TC(+) and IC(+). SP263 and SP142 showed strong concordance (k = 0.788) with combined(+) rates of 33.3% (42/126) and 34.9% (44/126), respectively. In DLBCL‐NOS, TC(+) by SP263 preferred to non‐GCB and immunoblastic variant DLBCL‐NOS (P = 0.029 and P = 0.004). Combined(+) (SP263 and SP142) were associated with more than one extranodal site involved (P = 0.006, P = 0.042), higher ECOG PS scores (P = 0.001, P < 0.001), high IPI risk (P = 0.012, P = 0.005), and poor treatment response (P = 0.095, P = 0.002). IC(+) by SP263 and SP142 were both independent risk factors (P = 0.027, P = 0.037). 9p24.1 locus amplification and gain were identified in 4.3% and 7.6% DLBCL‐NOS and indicated shorter overall survival (P = 0.004). Positive rate of PD‐L1 by RNAscope was 36.5%, while no clinical significance shown. PD‐L1 positive rates were all higher in PMBCL and DHL than in DLBCL‐NOS by SP263, SP142, RNAscope, and FISH (P = 0.001, P < 0.001, P = 0.005 and P < 0.001, respectively). In conclusion, combined PD‐L1 expression by IHC was potentially reliable and convenient as a predicting biomarker. SP263 staining was easier to evaluate and recognized more PD‐L1‐stained cells, but SP142 presented a better prognostic indicator. FISH and RNAscope could be used as supplementary assays. PMBCL itself was a sensitive cohort for immunotherapy. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-05-31 /pmc/articles/PMC6639200/ /pubmed/31150165 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2316 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Cancer Research Huang, Sixia Nong, Lin Liang, Li Zheng, Yalin Wang, Wei Liu, Jumei Li, Dong Li, Xin Wang, Ying Zhang, Bo Li, Ting Comparison of PD‐L1 detection assays and corresponding significance in evaluation of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma |
title | Comparison of PD‐L1 detection assays and corresponding significance in evaluation of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma |
title_full | Comparison of PD‐L1 detection assays and corresponding significance in evaluation of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma |
title_fullStr | Comparison of PD‐L1 detection assays and corresponding significance in evaluation of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of PD‐L1 detection assays and corresponding significance in evaluation of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma |
title_short | Comparison of PD‐L1 detection assays and corresponding significance in evaluation of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma |
title_sort | comparison of pd‐l1 detection assays and corresponding significance in evaluation of diffuse large b‐cell lymphoma |
topic | Clinical Cancer Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6639200/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31150165 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2316 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT huangsixia comparisonofpdl1detectionassaysandcorrespondingsignificanceinevaluationofdiffuselargebcelllymphoma AT nonglin comparisonofpdl1detectionassaysandcorrespondingsignificanceinevaluationofdiffuselargebcelllymphoma AT liangli comparisonofpdl1detectionassaysandcorrespondingsignificanceinevaluationofdiffuselargebcelllymphoma AT zhengyalin comparisonofpdl1detectionassaysandcorrespondingsignificanceinevaluationofdiffuselargebcelllymphoma AT wangwei comparisonofpdl1detectionassaysandcorrespondingsignificanceinevaluationofdiffuselargebcelllymphoma AT liujumei comparisonofpdl1detectionassaysandcorrespondingsignificanceinevaluationofdiffuselargebcelllymphoma AT lidong comparisonofpdl1detectionassaysandcorrespondingsignificanceinevaluationofdiffuselargebcelllymphoma AT lixin comparisonofpdl1detectionassaysandcorrespondingsignificanceinevaluationofdiffuselargebcelllymphoma AT wangying comparisonofpdl1detectionassaysandcorrespondingsignificanceinevaluationofdiffuselargebcelllymphoma AT zhangbo comparisonofpdl1detectionassaysandcorrespondingsignificanceinevaluationofdiffuselargebcelllymphoma AT liting comparisonofpdl1detectionassaysandcorrespondingsignificanceinevaluationofdiffuselargebcelllymphoma |