From the Department of Pathology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (Willis).
The Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Vermont Medical Center, Burlington (Eyerer).
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2023 Jan 1;147(1):62-70. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2021-0151-CP.
CONTEXT.—: Programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry companion diagnostic assays play a crucial role as predictive markers in patients being considered for immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. However, because of a convergence of several factors, including recognition of increased types of cancers susceptible to immunotherapy, increasing numbers of immune checkpoint inhibitors, and release of multiple PD-L1 immunohistochemistry antibodies with differing reporting systems, this complex testing environment has led to significant levels of confusion for pathologists and medical oncologists.
OBJECTIVE.—: To identify which processes and procedures have contributed to the current challenges surrounding programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 companion diagnostics and to propose potential remedies to this issue. This is based upon input from key industrial stakeholders in conjunction with the College of American Pathologists Personalized Health Care Committee.
DESIGN.—: A meeting of representatives of pharmaceutical and in vitro diagnostic companies along with the Personalized Health Care Committee reviewed the process of release of the PD-L1 companion diagnostic assays using a modified root cause analysis format. The modified root cause analysis envisioned an ideal circumstance of development and implementation of a companion diagnostic to identify shortcomings in the rollout of the PD-L1 assay and to suggest actions to improve future companion diagnostic assay releases.
RESULTS.—: The group recommended improvements to key principles in companion diagnostics implementation related to multi-stakeholder communication, increased regulatory flexibility to incorporate postapproval medical knowledge, improved cross-disciplinary information exchange between medical oncology and pathology societies, and enhanced postmarket training programs.
CONCLUSIONS.—: The rapidly changing nature of and increasing complexity associated with companion diagnostics require a fundamental review of processes related to their design, implementation, and oversight.
程序性死亡配体-1(PD-L1)免疫组织化学伴随诊断检测作为预测标志物,在考虑接受免疫检查点抑制剂治疗的患者中发挥着至关重要的作用。然而,由于多种因素的融合,包括认识到更多易患免疫治疗的癌症类型、免疫检查点抑制剂数量的增加,以及具有不同报告系统的多种 PD-L1 免疫组织化学抗体的释放,这种复杂的检测环境导致病理学家和肿瘤内科医生产生了相当大的困惑。
确定哪些过程和程序促成了当前围绕程序性死亡受体-1(PD-1)/PD-L1 伴随诊断的挑战,并针对该问题提出潜在的解决方案。这是基于制药和体外诊断公司的主要利益相关者的意见,并结合美国病理学家学院个性化医疗保健委员会的意见提出的。
制药和体外诊断公司的代表与个性化医疗保健委员会一起,使用改良的根本原因分析格式,对 PD-L1 伴随诊断检测试剂的放行过程进行了评估。改良的根本原因分析设想了一种理想的伴随诊断试剂开发和实施情况,以确定 PD-L1 检测试剂推出过程中的缺陷,并提出改进未来伴随诊断检测试剂发布的措施。
该小组建议改进伴随诊断试剂实施相关的关键原则,包括多利益相关者沟通、增加纳入批准后医学知识的监管灵活性、改善肿瘤内科和病理学会之间跨学科信息交流,以及加强上市后培训计划。
伴随诊断试剂的性质迅速变化且越来越复杂,需要对其设计、实施和监督相关流程进行根本审查。