Reinhard Büttner, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne; Manfred Dietel, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; John R. Gosney, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool; Andrew C. Wotherspoon, Royal Marsden Hospital, London; Keith M. Kerr, Aberdeen University Medical School and Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom; Birgit Guldhammer Skov, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; Julien Adam, Gustave Roussy Cancer Center, Villejuif; Frédérique Penault-Llorca, Jean Perrin Comprehensive Cancer Center, Clermont-Ferrand, France; Noriko Motoi, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan; Kenneth J. Bloom, Human Longevity, San Diego, CA; John W. Longshore, Carolinas Pathology Group, Charlotte, NC; Fernando López-Ríos, Hospital Universitario HM Sanchinarro, Madrid, Spain; Giuseppe Viale, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; and Ming-Sound Tsao, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Dec 1;35(34):3867-3876. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.74.7642. Epub 2017 Oct 20.
Purpose Three programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors are currently approved for treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Treatment with pembrolizumab in NSCLC requires PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) testing. Nivolumab and atezolizumab are approved without PD-L1 testing, though US Food and Drug Administration-cleared complementary PD-L1 tests are available for both. PD-L1 IHC assays used to assess PD-L1 expression in patients treated with programmed death-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in clinical trials include PD-L1 IHC 28-8 pharmDx (28-8), PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx (22C3), Ventana PD-L1 SP142 (SP142), and Ventana PD-L1 SP263 (SP263). Differences in antibodies and IHC platforms have raised questions about comparability among these assays and their diagnostic use. This review provides practical information to help physicians and pathologists understand analytical features and comparability of various PD-L1 IHC assays and their diagnostic use. Methods We reviewed and summarized published or otherwise reported studies (January 2016 to January 2017) on clinical trial and laboratory-developed PD-L1 IHC assays (LDAs). Studies assessing the effect of diagnostic methods on PD-L1 expression levels were analyzed to address practical issues related to tissue samples used for testing. Results High concordance and interobserver reproducibility were observed with the 28-8, 22C3, and SP263 clinical trial assays for PD-L1 expression on tumor cell membranes, whereas lower PD-L1 expression was detected with SP142. Immune-cell PD-L1 expression was variable and interobserver concordance was poor. Inter- and intratumoral heterogeneity had variable effects on PD-L1 expression. Concordance among LDAs was variable. Conclusion High concordance among 28-8, 22C3, and SP263 when assessing PD-L1 expression on tumor cell membranes suggests possible interchangeability of their clinical use for NSCLC but not for assessment of PD-L1 expression on immune cells. Development of LDAs requires stringent standardization before their recommendation for routine clinical use.
目前有 3 种程序性死亡受体-1(PD-1)/程序性死亡配体 1(PD-L1)抑制剂被批准用于治疗非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)。在 NSCLC 中使用 pembrolizumab 治疗需要进行 PD-L1 免疫组织化学(IHC)检测。nivolumab 和 atezolizumab 的批准不需要进行 PD-L1 检测,但美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)批准了两种药物的互补性 PD-L1 检测。用于评估接受 PD-1/PD-L1 抑制剂治疗的临床试验中患者的 PD-L1 表达的 PD-L1 IHC 检测包括 PD-L1 IHC 28-8 pharmDx(28-8)、PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx(22C3)、Ventana PD-L1 SP142(SP142)和 Ventana PD-L1 SP263(SP263)。抗体和 IHC 平台的差异引发了人们对这些检测之间的可比性及其诊断用途的质疑。本综述提供了实用信息,以帮助医生和病理学家了解各种 PD-L1 IHC 检测的分析特点和可比性及其诊断用途。
我们回顾和总结了 2016 年 1 月至 2017 年 1 月期间发表或报告的关于临床试验和实验室开发的 PD-L1 IHC 检测(LDAs)的研究。分析了评估诊断方法对 PD-L1 表达水平影响的研究,以解决与用于检测的组织样本相关的实际问题。
在肿瘤细胞膜上评估 PD-L1 表达时,28-8、22C3 和 SP263 临床试验检测的高度一致性和观察者间可重复性较好,而 SP142 检测到的 PD-L1 表达较低。免疫细胞 PD-L1 表达具有变异性,观察者间的一致性较差。肿瘤内和肿瘤间的异质性对 PD-L1 表达有不同的影响。LDAs 之间的一致性也各不相同。
在评估肿瘤细胞膜上的 PD-L1 表达时,28-8、22C3 和 SP263 之间的高度一致性表明,它们在 NSCLC 中的临床应用可能具有可替代性,但不用于评估免疫细胞上的 PD-L1 表达。在推荐 LDAs 用于常规临床应用之前,需要进行严格的标准化。