Cargando…

PD-L1 immunohistochemistry in non-small-cell lung cancer: unraveling differences in staining concordance and interpretation

Programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) is accepted as a predictive biomarker for the selection of immune checkpoint inhibitors. We evaluated the staining quality and estimation of the tumor proportion score (TPS) in non-small-cell lung cancer during two external quality assessm...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Keppens, Cleo, Dequeker, Elisabeth MC, Pauwels, Patrick, Ryska, Ales, ‘t Hart, Nils, von der Thüsen, Jan H
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8099807/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33275169
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00428-020-02976-5
_version_ 1783688650989502464
author Keppens, Cleo
Dequeker, Elisabeth MC
Pauwels, Patrick
Ryska, Ales
‘t Hart, Nils
von der Thüsen, Jan H
author_facet Keppens, Cleo
Dequeker, Elisabeth MC
Pauwels, Patrick
Ryska, Ales
‘t Hart, Nils
von der Thüsen, Jan H
author_sort Keppens, Cleo
collection PubMed
description Programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) is accepted as a predictive biomarker for the selection of immune checkpoint inhibitors. We evaluated the staining quality and estimation of the tumor proportion score (TPS) in non-small-cell lung cancer during two external quality assessment (EQA) schemes by the European Society of Pathology. Participants received two tissue micro-arrays with three (2017) and four (2018) cases for PD-L1 IHC and a positive tonsil control, for staining by their routine protocol. After the participants returned stained slides to the EQA coordination center, three pathologists assessed each slide and awarded an expert staining score from 1 to 5 points based on the staining concordance. Expert scores significantly (p < 0.01) improved between EQA schemes from 3.8 (n = 67) to 4.3 (n = 74) on 5 points. Participants used 32 different protocols: the majority applied the 22C3 (56.7%) (Dako), SP263 (19.1%) (Ventana), and E1L3N (Cell Signaling) (7.1%) clones. Staining artifacts consisted mainly of very weak or weak antigen demonstration (63.0%) or excessive background staining (19.8%). Participants using CE-IVD kits reached a higher score compared with those using laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) (p < 0.05), mainly attributed to a better concordance of SP263. The TPS was under- and over-estimated in 20/423 (4.7%) and 24/423 (5.7%) cases, respectively, correlating to a lower expert score. Additional research is needed on the concordance of less common protocols, and on reasons for lower LDT concordance. Laboratories should carefully validate all test methods and regularly verify their performance. EQA participation should focus on both staining concordance and interpretation of PD-L1 IHC. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00428-020-02976-5.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8099807
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80998072021-05-11 PD-L1 immunohistochemistry in non-small-cell lung cancer: unraveling differences in staining concordance and interpretation Keppens, Cleo Dequeker, Elisabeth MC Pauwels, Patrick Ryska, Ales ‘t Hart, Nils von der Thüsen, Jan H Virchows Arch Original Article Programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) is accepted as a predictive biomarker for the selection of immune checkpoint inhibitors. We evaluated the staining quality and estimation of the tumor proportion score (TPS) in non-small-cell lung cancer during two external quality assessment (EQA) schemes by the European Society of Pathology. Participants received two tissue micro-arrays with three (2017) and four (2018) cases for PD-L1 IHC and a positive tonsil control, for staining by their routine protocol. After the participants returned stained slides to the EQA coordination center, three pathologists assessed each slide and awarded an expert staining score from 1 to 5 points based on the staining concordance. Expert scores significantly (p < 0.01) improved between EQA schemes from 3.8 (n = 67) to 4.3 (n = 74) on 5 points. Participants used 32 different protocols: the majority applied the 22C3 (56.7%) (Dako), SP263 (19.1%) (Ventana), and E1L3N (Cell Signaling) (7.1%) clones. Staining artifacts consisted mainly of very weak or weak antigen demonstration (63.0%) or excessive background staining (19.8%). Participants using CE-IVD kits reached a higher score compared with those using laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) (p < 0.05), mainly attributed to a better concordance of SP263. The TPS was under- and over-estimated in 20/423 (4.7%) and 24/423 (5.7%) cases, respectively, correlating to a lower expert score. Additional research is needed on the concordance of less common protocols, and on reasons for lower LDT concordance. Laboratories should carefully validate all test methods and regularly verify their performance. EQA participation should focus on both staining concordance and interpretation of PD-L1 IHC. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00428-020-02976-5. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-12-04 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8099807/ /pubmed/33275169 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00428-020-02976-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Keppens, Cleo
Dequeker, Elisabeth MC
Pauwels, Patrick
Ryska, Ales
‘t Hart, Nils
von der Thüsen, Jan H
PD-L1 immunohistochemistry in non-small-cell lung cancer: unraveling differences in staining concordance and interpretation
title PD-L1 immunohistochemistry in non-small-cell lung cancer: unraveling differences in staining concordance and interpretation
title_full PD-L1 immunohistochemistry in non-small-cell lung cancer: unraveling differences in staining concordance and interpretation
title_fullStr PD-L1 immunohistochemistry in non-small-cell lung cancer: unraveling differences in staining concordance and interpretation
title_full_unstemmed PD-L1 immunohistochemistry in non-small-cell lung cancer: unraveling differences in staining concordance and interpretation
title_short PD-L1 immunohistochemistry in non-small-cell lung cancer: unraveling differences in staining concordance and interpretation
title_sort pd-l1 immunohistochemistry in non-small-cell lung cancer: unraveling differences in staining concordance and interpretation
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8099807/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33275169
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00428-020-02976-5
work_keys_str_mv AT keppenscleo pdl1immunohistochemistryinnonsmallcelllungcancerunravelingdifferencesinstainingconcordanceandinterpretation
AT dequekerelisabethmc pdl1immunohistochemistryinnonsmallcelllungcancerunravelingdifferencesinstainingconcordanceandinterpretation
AT pauwelspatrick pdl1immunohistochemistryinnonsmallcelllungcancerunravelingdifferencesinstainingconcordanceandinterpretation
AT ryskaales pdl1immunohistochemistryinnonsmallcelllungcancerunravelingdifferencesinstainingconcordanceandinterpretation
AT thartnils pdl1immunohistochemistryinnonsmallcelllungcancerunravelingdifferencesinstainingconcordanceandinterpretation
AT vonderthusenjanh pdl1immunohistochemistryinnonsmallcelllungcancerunravelingdifferencesinstainingconcordanceandinterpretation