Dataset Information

Technical validation of an autoantibody test for lung cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Publications on autoantibodies to tumour-associated antigens (TAAs) have failed to show either calibration or reproducibility data. The validation of a panel of six TAAs to which autoantibodies have been described is reported here.

Materials and methods

Three separate groups of patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer were identified, along with control individuals, and their samples used to validate an enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay. Precision, linearity, assay reproducibility and antigen batch reproducibility were all assessed.

Results

For between-replicate error, samples with higher signals gave coefficients of variation (CVs) in the range 7%-15%. CVs for between-plate variation were only 1%-2% higher. For between-run error, CVs were in the range 15%-28%. In linearity studies, the slope was close to 1.0 and correlation coefficient values were generally >0.8. The sensitivity and specificity of individual batches of antigen varied slightly between groups of patients; however, the sensitivity and specificity of the panel of antigens as a whole remained constant. The validity of the calibration system was demonstrated.

Conclusions

A calibrated six-panel assay of TAAs has been validated for identifying nearly 40% of primary lung cancers via a peripheral blood test. Levels of reproducibility, precision and linearity would be acceptable for an assay used in a regulated clinical setting.

SUBMITTER: Murray A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2911202 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Technical validation of an autoantibody test for lung cancer.

Murray A A Chapman C J CJ Healey G G Peek L J LJ Parsons G G Baldwin D D Barnes A A Sewell H F HF Fritsche H A HA Robertson J F R JFR

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology 20100202 8

<h4>Background</h4>Publications on autoantibodies to tumour-associated antigens (TAAs) have failed to show either calibration or reproducibility data. The validation of a panel of six TAAs to which autoantibodies have been described is reported here.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Three separate groups of patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer were identified, along with control individuals, and their samples used to validate an enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay. Precision, linearity, assay rep ...[more]

PMID: 20124350

Similar Datasets

Project description:Patients who have incidentally detected pulmonary nodules and an estimated intermediate risk (5-60%) of lung cancer frequently are followed via computed tomography (CT) surveillance to detect nodule growth, despite guidelines for a more aggressive diagnostic strategy. We examined the cost-effectiveness of an autoantibody test (AABT)-Early Cancer Detection Test-Lung (EarlyCDT-LungTM)-as an aid to early diagnosis of lung cancer among such patients.We developed a decision-analytic model to evaluate use of the AABT versus CT surveillance alone. In the model, patients with a positive AABT-because they are at substantially enhanced risk of lung cancer-are assumed to go directly to biopsy, resulting in diagnosis of lung cancer in earlier stages than under current guidelines (a beneficial stage shift). Patients with a negative AABT, and those scheduled for CT surveillance alone, are assumed to have periodic CT screenings to detect rapid growth and thus to have their lung cancers diagnosed-on average-at more advanced stages.Among 1,000 patients who have incidentally detected nodules 8-30 mm, have an intermediate-risk of lung cancer, and are evaluated by CT surveillance alone, 95 (9.5%) are assumed to have lung cancer (local, 73.6%; regional, 22.0%; distant, 4.4%). With use of the AABT set at a sensitivity/specificity of 41%/93% (stage shift = 10.8%), although expected costs would be higher by $949,442 ($949 per person), life years would be higher by 53 (0.05 per person), resulting in a cost per life-year gained of $18,029 and a cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of $24,330. With use of the AABT set at a sensitivity/specificity of 28%/98% (stage shift = 7.4%), corresponding cost-effectiveness ratios would be $18,454 and $24,833.Under our base-case assumptions, and reasonable variations thereof, using AABT as an aid in the early diagnosis of lung cancer in patients with incidentally detected pulmonary nodules who are estimated to be at intermediate risk of lung cancer and are scheduled for CT surveillance alone is likely to be a cost-effective use of healthcare resources.

Project description:BackgroundProgrammed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) is used as biomarker for pembrolizumab therapy in advanced stage lung cancer patients. However, data permitting direct performance comparison between cytology and surgical specimen types are limited since both specimens from a single tumor site are infrequently available. In addition, alcohol fixation used with cytology specimens requires technical validation of the PD-L1 IHC assay before clinical use. We here report our experience with implementation of the PD-L1 22C3 IHC pharmDxTM assay for cytologic samples at a large tertiary cancer center.Study designArchival formalin-fixed (FF), paraffin-embedded cell blocks (CBs) and subsequent lung tumor resections (LTRs) from the same anatomical site were used for a direct comparison of PD-L1 tumor proportion scores (TPSs). TPS values were independently determined by one surgical lung pathologist and two cytopathologists blinded to the specimen pairs. An interim analysis was performed to facilitate the pooling of expertise among observers. After PD-L1 22C3 IHC pharmDxTM implementation for FF cytology specimens, dual-processed samples were used for a prospective technical validation of CytoLyt® prefixation (CF). Digital image analysis was performed for a subset of dual-processed specimens.ResultsEighty-one CBs and LTRs were included for comparison of the specimen types. PD-L1 assessment in CBs had an accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 88.9/72.8, 66.7/73.5, 95.2/72.3, 80.0/65.8, and 90.9/79.1% for the ≥50/≥1% cutoff, respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76, 0.90), and it improved after interim analysis (before: 0.79 and after: 0.92). The overall concordance between CF and FF for the categories defined by the ≥50/≥1% cutoff values was 90.4% (95% CI: 79.0, 96.8). Similar assay performance was confirmed by digital analysis.ConclusionsPD-L1 22C3 IHC pharmDxTM shows good reliability if used with CB preparations. CF does not impact assay results significantly. Clinical validation with outcome data is needed, and digital methods of assessment should be further investigated.

Dataset Information

Technical validation of an autoantibody test for lung cancer.

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Technical validation of an autoantibody test for lung cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure