Utility of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry assays for predicting PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor response.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Diggs LP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5353958 | biostudies-other | 2017
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Publications
Utility of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry assays for predicting PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor response.
Diggs Laurence P LP Hsueh Eddy C EC
Biomarker research 20170315
We have seen a notable increase in the application of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for the treatment of several solid and hematogenous malignancies including metastatic melanoma, non-small-cell lung cancer and lymphoma to name a few. The need for biomarkers for identification of a suitable patient population for this type of therapy is now pressing. While specific biomarker assays have been developed for these checkpoint inhibitors based on their respective epitopes, the available studies suggested the ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Different clones, protocol conditions, instruments, and scoring/readout methods may pose challenges in introducing different PD-L1 assays for immunotherapy. The diagnostic accuracy of using different PD-L1 assays interchangeably for various purposes is unknown. The primary objective of this meta-analysis was to address PD-L1 assay interchangeability based on assay diagnostic accuracy for established clinical uses/purposes. A systematic search of the MEDLINE database using PubMed platform was conducted using "PD-L1" as a search term for 01/01/2015 to 31/08/2018, with limitations "English" and "human". 2,515 abstracts were reviewed to select for original contributions only. 57 studies on comparison of two or more PD-L1 assays were fully reviewed. 22 publications were selected for meta-analysis. Additional data were requested from authors of 20/22 studies in order to enable the meta-analysis. Modified GRADE and QUADAS-2 criteria were used for grading published evidence and designing data abstraction templates for extraction by reviewers. PRISMA was used to guide reporting of systematic review and meta-analysis and STARD 2015 for reporting diagnostic accuracy study. CLSI EP12-A2 was used to guide test comparisons. Data were pooled using random-effects model. The main outcome measure was diagnostic accuracy of various PD-L1 assays. The 22 included studies provided 376 2×2 contingency tables for analyses. Results of our study suggest that, when the testing laboratory is not able to use an Food and Drug Administration-approved companion diagnostic(s) for PD-L1 assessment for its specific clinical purpose(s), it is better to develop a properly validated laboratory developed test for the same purpose(s) as the original PD-L1 Food and Drug Administration-approved immunohistochemistry companion diagnostic, than to replace the original PD-L1 Food and Drug Administration-approved immunohistochemistry companion diagnostic with a another PD-L1 Food and Drug Administration-approved companion diagnostic that was developed for a different purpose.
| S-EPMC6927905 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry is used to determine which patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) respond best to treatment with PD-L1 inhibitors. For each inhibitor, a unique immunohistochemical assay was developed. This systematic review gives an up-to-date insight into the comparability of standardised immunohistochemical assays and laboratory-developed tests (LDTs), focusing specifically on tumour cell (TC) staining and scoring. A systematic search was performed identifying publications that assessed interassay, interobserver and/or interlaboratory concordance of PD-L1 assays and LDTs in tissue of NSCLC patients. Of 4294 publications identified through the systematic search, 27 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were of sufficient methodological quality. Studies assessing interassay concordance found high agreement between assays 22C3, 28-8 and SP263 and properly validated LDTs, and lower concordance for comparisons involving SP142. A decrease in concordance, however, is seen with use of cut-offs, which hampers interchangeability of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry assays and LDTs. Studies assessing interobserver concordance found high agreement for all assays and LDTs, but lower agreement with use of a 1% cut-off. This may be problematic in clinical practice, as discordance between pathologists at this cut-off may result in some patients being denied valuable treatment options. Finally, five studies assessed interlaboratory concordance and found moderate to high agreement levels for various assays and LDTs. However, to assess the actual existence of interlaboratory variation in PD-L1 testing and PD-L1 positivity in clinical practice, studies using real-world clinical pathology data are needed.
| S-EPMC7318295 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Programmed death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is the key FDA-approved predictive marker to identify responders to anti-PD1 axis drugs. Multiple PD-L1 IHC assays with various antibodies and cut points have been used in clinical trials across tumor types. Comparative performance characteristics of these assays have been extensively studied qualitatively but not quantitatively. Here we evaluate the use of a standardized PD-L1 Index tissue microarray (TMA) to objectively determine agreement between antibody assays for PD-L1 applying quantitative digital image analysis. Using a specially constructed Index TMA containing a panel of ten isogenic cell lines in triplicate, we tested identical but independently grown batches of isogenic cells to prove Index TMAs can be produced in large quantities and hence serve as a standardization tool. Then the Index TMAs were evaluated using quantitative immunofluorescence (QIF) to validate the TMA itself and also to compare antibodies including E1L3N, SP142 and SP263. Next, an inter-laboratory and inter-assay comparison of 5 PD-L1 chromogenic IHC assays (US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved and lab developed test (LDT)) were performed at 12 sites around the USA. As previously reported, the SP142 FDA assay failed to detect low levels of PD-L1 in cell lines distinguished by the other four assays. The assays for 22C3 FDA, 28-8-FDA, SP263 FDA, and E1L3N LDT were highly similar across sites and all laboratories showed a high consistency over time for all assays using this Index TMA. In conclusion, we were able to objectively quantify PD-L1 expression on a standardized Index TMA using digital image analysis and we confirmed previous subjective assessments of these assays, but now in a multi-institutional setting. We envision commercial use of this Index TMA or similar smaller version as a useful standardization mechanism to compare results between institutions and to identify abnormalities while running routine clinical samples.
| S-EPMC6920558 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Immunotherapy for the treatment of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) positive locally advanced or metastatic triple negative breast cancer may benefit patients with metaplastic breast cancer (MpBC). Previous study of PD-L1 in MpBC scored tumor cells (TCs), different from Food and Drug Administration-approved scoring methods. We sought to define PD-L1 expression in MpBCs and to evaluate concordance of 3 PD-L1 assays. Primary, treatment naive MpBC treated at our Center from 1998 to 2019 were identified. PD-L1 expression was assessed using SP142, E1L3n, and 73-10. We evaluated PD-L1 expression on tumor infiltrating immune cells (IC) and also in TCs. For each assay, we scored PD-L1 expression using ≥1% IC expression according to the IMpassion130 trial criteria and using combined positive score (CPS) ≥10 according to the KEYNOTE-355 trial cutoff. A total of 42 MpBCs were identified. Most MpBC had PD-L1 positivity in ≥1% IC with all 3 assays (95%, 95%, 86%) in contrast to a maximum 71% with a CPS ≥10. PD-L1 IC expression was comparable between the SP142 and 73-10 assays and was lowest with E1L3n. PD-L1 TC expression was lowest using SP142. The overall concordance for IC scoring was 88% while 62% had concordant CPS. For each assay, the results of the 2 scoring algorithms were not interchangeable. The SP142 assay showed distinct expression patterns between IC (granular, dot-like) and TC (membranous) while 73-10 and E1L3n showed membranous and/or cytoplasmic expression in both IC and TC. Most MpBC in our cohort were positive for PD-L1 indicating eligibility for anti-PD-L1/programmed death-1 immunotherapy.
| S-EPMC9437740 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFor non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), treatment with pembrolizumab is limited to patients with tumours expressing PD-L1 assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) using the PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx (Dako, Inc.) companion diagnostic test, on the Dako Autostainer Link 48 (ASL48) platform. Optimised protocols are urgently needed for use of the 22C3 antibody concentrate to test PD-L1 expression on more widely available IHC autostainers.MethodsWe evaluated PD-L1 expression using the 22C3 antibody concentrate in the three main commercially available autostainers Dako ASL48, BenchMark ULTRA (Ventana Medical Systems, Inc.), and Bond-III (Leica Biosystems) and compared the staining results with the PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx kit on the Dako ASL48 platform. Several technical conditions for laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) were evaluated in tonsil specimens and a training set of three NSCLC samples. Optimised protocols were then validated in 120 NSCLC specimens.ResultsOptimised protocols were obtained on both the VENTANA BenchMark ULTRA and Dako ASL48 platforms. Significant expression of PD-L1 was obtained on tissue controls with the Leica Bond-III autostainer when high concentrations of the 22C3 antibody were used. It therefore was not tested on the 120 NSCLC specimens. An almost 100% concordance rate for dichotomized tumour proportion score (TPS) results was observed between TPS ratings using the 22C3 antibody concentrate on the Dako ASL48 and VENTANA BenchMark ULTRA platforms relative to the PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx kit on the Dako ASL48 platform. Interpathologist agreement was high on both LDTs and the PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx kit on the Dako ASL48 platform.ConclusionAvailability of standardized protocols for determining PD-L1 expression using the 22C3 antibody concentrate on the widely available Dako ASL48 and VENTANA BenchMark ULTRA IHC platforms will expand the number of laboratories able to determine eligibility of patients with NSCLC for treatment with pembrolizumab in a reliable and concordant manner.
| S-EPMC5552229 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Four assays registered with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) detect programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) to enrich for patient response to anti-programmed cell death 1 and anti-PD-L1 therapies. The tests use 4 separate PD-L1 antibodies on 2 separate staining platforms and have their own scoring systems, which raises questions about their similarity and the potential interchangeability of the tests. Objective:To compare the performance of 4 PD-L1 platforms, including 2 FDA-cleared assays, 1 test for investigational use only, and 1 laboratory-developed test. Design, Setting, and Participants:Four serial histologic sections from 90 archival non-small cell lung cancers from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2010, were distributed to 3 sites that performed the following immunohistochemical assays: 28-8 antibody on the Dako Link 48 platform, 22c3 antibody on the Dako Link 48 platform, SP142 antibody on the Ventana Benchmark platform, and E1L3N antibody on the Leica Bond platform. The slides were scanned and scored by 13 pathologists who estimated the percentage of malignant and immune cells expressing PD-L1. Statistical analyses were performed from December 1, 2015, to August 30, 2016, to compare antibodies and pathologists' scoring of tumor and immune cells. Main Outcomes and Measures:Percentages of malignant and immune cells expressing PD-L1. Results:Among the 90 samples, the SP142 assay was an outlier, with a significantly lower mean score of PD-L1 expression in both tumor and immune cells (tumor cells: 22c3, 2.96; 28-8, 3.26; SP142, 1.99; E1L3N, 3.20; overall mean, 2.85; and immune cells: 22c3, 2.15; 28-8, 2.28; SP142, 1.62; E1L3N, 2.28; overall mean, 2.08). Pairwise comparisons showed that the scores from the 28-8 and E1L3N tests were not significantly different but that the 22c3 test showed a slight (mean difference, 0.24-0.30) but statistically significant reduction in labeling of PD-L1 expression in tumor cells. Evaluation of intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) between antibodies to quantify interassay variability for PD-L1 expression in tumor cells showed high concordance between antibodies for tumor cell scoring (0.813; 95% CI, 0.815-0.839) and lower levels of concordance for immune cell scoring (0.277; 95% CI, 0.222-0.334). When examining variability between pathologists for any single assay, the concordance between pathologists' scoring for PD-L1 expression in tumor cells ranged from ICCs of 0.832 (95% CI, 0.820-0.844) to 0.882 (95% CI, 0.873-0.891) for each assay, while the ICCs from immune cells for each assay ranged from 0.172 (95% CI, 0.156-0.189) to 0.229 (95% CI, 0.211-0.248). Conclusions and Relevance:The assay using the SP142 antibody is an outlier that detected significantly less PD-L1 expression in tumor cells and immune cells. The assay for antibody 22c3 showed slight yet statistically significantly lower staining than either 28-8 or E1L3N, but this significance was detected only when using the mean of 13 pathologists' scores. The pathologists showed excellent concordance when scoring tumor cells stained with any antibody but poor concordance for scoring immune cells stained with any antibody. Thus, for tumor cell assessment of PD-L1, 3 of the 4 tests are concordant and reproducible as read by pathologists.
| S-EPMC5650234 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a promising advance in the treatment of patients with lung cancer. However, each ICI has been tested with an independently designed companion diagnostic assay that is based on a unique antibody. Consequently, the different trial-validated programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) assays should not be considered interchangeable. Our aim was to compare the performance of each available PD-L1 antibody for its ability to accurately measure PD-L1 expression and to investigate the possibility of harmonization across antibodies through the use of a new rapid IHC system, which uses noncontact alternating current (AC) mixing to achieve more stable staining.MethodsFirst, 58 resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) specimens were stained using three PD-L1 IHC assays (28-8, SP142, and SP263) to assess the harmonization achieved with AC mixing IHC. Second, specimens from 27 patients receiving ICIs for postoperative recurrent NSCLC were stained using the same IHC method to compare the clinical performance of ICIs to PD-L1 scores. All patients received a tumor proportion score (TPS) with the 22C3 companion diagnostic test.ResultsBetter staining was achieved with the new AC mixing IHC method than the conventional IHC in PD-L1-positive cases, and the interchangeability of some combinations of assays was increased in PD-L1-positive. In addition, AC mixing IHC provided more appropriate overall response rates for ICIs in all assays.ConclusionsStable PD-L1 IHC driven by AC mixing helped to improve TPS scoring and patient selection for ICIs through interchangeable assays.
| S-EPMC8046066 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo investigate the efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy versus anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy in advanced microsatellite instability (MSI)/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) gastrointestinal cancers.MethodsWe retrospectively recruited patients with MSI/dMMR gastrointestinal cancer who received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 with or without chemotherapy and compared objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy (chemo-anti-PD-1/PD-L1 group) and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor alone (anti-PD-1/PD-L1 group). Propensity score-based overlap weighting analysis was conducted to adjust the baseline covariable imbalance. Sensitivity analysis was performed to confirm the stability of the results by propensity score matching and multivariable Cox and logistic regression models.ResultsA total of 256 patients were eligible, with 68 and 188 receiving chemo-anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and anti-PD-1/PD-L1, respectively. The chemo-anti-PD-1/PD-L1 group showed significant improvements versus the anti-PD-1/PD-L1 group in ORR (61.8% v 38.8%; P = .001), DCR (92.6% v 74.5%; P = .002), PFS (median PFS [mPFS], not reached [NR] v 27.9 months; P = .004), and OS (median OS [mOS], NR v NR; P = .014). After overlap weighting, the improvements tended to be more significant with chemo-anti-PD-1/PD-L1 versus anti-PD-1/PD-L1 in ORR (62.5% v. 38.3%; P < .001), DCR (93.8% v 74.2%; P < .001), PFS (mPFS, NR v 26.0 months; P = .004), and OS (mOS, NR v NR; P = .010). These results were solidified through sensitivity analysis.ConclusionChemo-anti-PD-1/PD-L1 is superior to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 in MSI/dMMR gastrointestinal cancers with improved efficacy.
| S-EPMC10309553 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) has been traditionally used for predicting clinical responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, there are at least 4 different assays and antibodies used for PD-L1 IHC, each developed with a different ICI. We set to test if next generation RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) is a robust method to determine PD-L1 mRNA expression levels and furthermore, efficacy of predicting response to ICIs as compared to routinely used, standardized IHC procedures. METHODS:A total of 209 cancer patients treated on-label by FDA-approved ICIs, with evaluable responses were assessed for PD-L1 expression by RNA-seq and IHC, based on tumor proportion score (TPS) and immune cell staining (ICS). A subset of serially diluted cases was evaluated for RNA-seq assay performance across a broad range of PD-L1 expression levels. RESULTS:Assessment of PD-L1 mRNA levels by RNA-seq demonstrated robust linearity across high and low expression ranges. PD-L1 mRNA levels assessed by RNA-seq and IHC (TPS and ICS) were highly correlated (p?<?2e-16). Sub-analyses showed sustained correlation when IHC results were classified as high or low by clinically accepted cut-offs (p?<?0.01), and results did not differ by tumor type or anti-PD-L1 antibody used. Overall, a combined positive PD-L1 result (?1% IHC TPS and high PD-L1 expression by RNA-Seq) was associated with a 2-to-5-fold higher overall response rate (ORR) compared to a double negative result. Standard assessments of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) showed that a PD-L1 positive assessment for melanoma samples by RNA-seq had the lowest sensitivity (25%) but the highest PPV (72.7%). Among the three tumor types analyzed in this study, the only non-overlapping confidence interval for predicting response was for "RNA-seq low vs high" in melanoma. CONCLUSIONS:Measurement of PD-L1 mRNA expression by RNA-seq is comparable to PD-L1 expression by IHC both analytically and clinically in predicting ICI response. RNA-seq has the added advantages of being amenable to standardization and avoidance of interpretation bias. PD-L1 by RNA-seq needs to be validated in future prospective ICI clinical studies across multiple histologies.
| S-EPMC6346512 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have changed the clinical management of melanoma. However, not all patients respond, and current biomarkers including PD-L1 and mutational burden show incomplete predictive performance. The clinical validity and utility of complex biomarkers have not been studied in melanoma.MethodsCutaneous metastatic melanoma patients at eight institutions were evaluated for PD-L1 expression, CD8+ T-cell infiltration pattern, mutational burden, and 394 immune transcript expression. PD-L1 IHC and mutational burden were assessed for association with overall survival (OS) in 94 patients treated prior to ICI approval by the FDA (historical-controls), and in 137 patients treated with ICIs. Unsupervised analysis revealed distinct immune-clusters with separate response rates. This comprehensive immune profiling data were then integrated to generate a continuous Response Score (RS) based upon response criteria (RECIST v.1.1). RS was developed using a single institution training cohort (n = 48) and subsequently tested in a separate eight institution validation cohort (n = 29) to mimic a real-world clinical scenario.ResultsPD-L1 positivity ≥1% correlated with response and OS in ICI-treated patients, but demonstrated limited predictive performance. High mutational burden was associated with response in ICI-treated patients, but not with OS. Comprehensive immune profiling using RS demonstrated higher sensitivity (72.2%) compared to PD-L1 IHC (34.25%) and tumor mutational burden (32.5%), but with similar specificity.ConclusionsIn this study, the response score derived from comprehensive immune profiling in a limited melanoma cohort showed improved predictive performance as compared to PD-L1 IHC and tumor mutational burden.
| S-EPMC5944039 | biostudies-literature