PD-L1 Immunohistochemistry Comparability Study in Real-Life Clinical Samples: Results of Blueprint Phase 2 Project

Objectives: The Blueprint (BP) Programmed Death Ligand 1 (PD-L1) Immunohistochemistry Comparability Project is a pivotal academic/professional society and industrial collaboration to assess the feasibility of harmonizing the clinical use of five independently developed commercial PD-L1 immunohistochemistry assays. The goal of BP phase 2 (BP2) was to validate the results obtained in BP phase 1 by using real-world clinical lung cancer samples. Methods: BP2 were conducted using 81 lung cancer specimens of various histological and sample types, stained with all five trial-validated PD-L1 assays (22C3, 28-8, SP142, SP263, and 73-10); the slides were evaluated by an international panel of pathologists. BP2 also assessed the reliability of PD-L1 scoring by using digital images, and samples prepared for cytological examination. PD-L1 expression was assessed for percentage (tumor proportional score) of tumor cell (TC) and immune cell areas showing PD-L1 staining, with TCs scored continuously or categorically with the cutoffs used in checkpoint inhibitor trials. Results: The BP2 results showed highly comparable staining by the 22C3, 28-8 and SP263 assays; less sensitivity with the SP142 assay; and higher sensitivity with the 73-10 assay to detect PD-L1 expression on TCs. Glass slide and digital image scorings were highly concordant (Pearson correlation >0.96). There was very strong reliability among pathologists in TC PD-L1 scoring with all assays (overall intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.86–0.93), poor reliability in IC PD-L1 scoring (overall ICC = 0.18–0.19), and good agreement in assessing PD-L1 status on cytological cell block materials (ICC = 0.78–0.85). Conclusion: BP2 consolidates the analytical evidence for interchangeability of the 22C3, 28-8, and SP263 assays and lower sensitivity of the SP142 assay for determining tumor proportion score on TCs and demonstrates greater sensitivity of the 73-10 assay compared with that of the other assays

Interobserver variation among pathologists and refinement of criteria in distinguishing separate primary tumors from intrapulmonary metastases in lung

Multiple tumor nodules are seen with increasing frequency in clinical practice. On the basis of the 2015 WHO classification of lung tumors, we assessed the reproducibility of the comprehensive histologic assessment to distinguish second primary lung cancers (SPLCs) from intrapulmonary metastases (IPMs), looking for the most distinctive histologic features. An international panel of lung pathologists reviewed a scanned sequential cohort of 126 tumors from 48 patients and recorded an agreed set of histologic features, including tumor typing and predominant pattern of adenocarcinoma, thereby opining whether the case was SPLC, IPM, or a combination thereof. Cohen kappa statistics of 0.60 on overall assessment of SPLC or IPM indicated a good agreement. Likewise, there was good agreement (kappa score 0.64, p < 0.0001) between WHO histologic pattern in individual cases and SPLC or IPM status, but the proportions diversified for histologic pattern and SPLC or IPM status (McNemar test, p < 0.0001). The strongest associations for distinguishing between SPLC and IPM were observed for nuclear pleomorphism, cell size, acinus formation, nucleolar size, mitotic rate, nuclear inclusions, intraalveolar clusters, and necrosis. Conversely, the associations for lymphocytosis, mucin content, lepidic growth, vascular invasion, macrophage response, clear cell change, acute inflammation keratinization, and emperipolesis did not reach significance with tumor extent. Comprehensive histologic assessment is recommended for distinguishing SPLC from IPM with good reproducibility among lung pathologists. In addition to main histologic type and predominant patterns of histologic subtypes, nuclear pleomorphism, cell size, acinus formation, nucleolar size, and mitotic rate strongly correlate with pathologic staging status. (C) 2017 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.N

Defining Morphologic Features of Invasion in Pulmonary Nonmucinous Adenocarcinoma With Lepidic Growth: A Proposal by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Pathology Committee

Introduction: Since the eight edition of the Union for International Cancer Control and American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM classification system, the primary tumor pT stage is determined on the basis of presence and size of the invasive components. The aim of this study was to identify histologic features in tumors with lepidic growth pattern which may be used to establish criteria for distinguishing invasive from noninvasive areas. Methods: A Delphi approach was used with two rounds of blinded anonymized analysis of resected nonmucinous lung adenocarcinoma cases with presumed invasive and noninvasive components, followed by one round of reviewer de-anonymized and unblinded review of cases with known outcomes. A digital pathology platform was used for measuring total tumor size and invasive tumor size. Results: The mean coefficient of variation for measuring total tumor size and tumor invasive size was 6.9% (range: 1.7%–22.3%) and 54% (range: 14.7%–155%), respectively, with substantial variations in interpretation of the size and location of invasion among pathologists. Following the presentation of the results and further discussion among members at large of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Pathology Committee, extensive epithelial proliferation (EEP) in areas of collapsed lepidic growth pattern is recognized as a feature likely to be associated with invasive growth. The EEP is characterized by multilayered luminal epithelial cell growth, usually with high-grade cytologic features in several alveolar spaces. Conclusions: Collapsed alveoli and transition zones with EEP were identified by the Delphi process as morphologic features that were a source of interobserver variability. Definition criteria for collapse and EEP are proposed to improve reproducibility of invasion measurement

Best Practices Recommendations for Diagnostic Immunohistochemistry in Lung Cancer

Since the 2015 WHO classification was introduced into clinical practice, immunohistochemistry (IHC) has figured prominently in lung cancer diagnosis. In addition to distinction of small cell versus non–small cell carcinoma, patients’ treatment of choice is directly linked to histologic subtypes of non–small cell carcinoma, which pertains to IHC results, particularly for poorly differentiated tumors. The use of IHC has improved diagnostic accuracy in the classification of lung carcinoma, but the interpretation of IHC results remains challenging in some instances. Also, pathologists must be aware of many interpretation pitfalls, and the use of IHC should be efficient to spare the tissue for molecular testing. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Pathology Committee received questions on practical application and interpretation of IHC in lung cancer diagnosis. After discussions in several International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Pathology Committee meetings, the issues and caveats were summarized in terms of 11 key questions covering common and important diagnostic situations in a daily clinical practice with some relevant challenging queries. The questions cover topics such as the best IHC markers for distinguishing NSCLC subtypes, differences in thyroid transcription factor 1 clones, and the utility of IHC in diagnosing uncommon subtypes of lung cancer and distinguishing primary from metastatic tumors. This article provides answers and explanations for the key questions about the use of IHC in diagnosis of lung carcinoma, representing viewpoints of experts in thoracic pathology that should assist the community in the appropriate use of IHC in diagnostic pathology

Interobserver Variation among Pathologists and Refinement of Criteria in Distinguishing Separate Primary Tumors from Intrapulmonary Metastases in Lung

Multiple tumor nodules are seen with increasing frequency in clinical practice. On the basis of the 2015 WHO classification of lung tumors, we assessed the reproducibility of the comprehensive histologic assessment to distinguish second primary lung cancers (SPLCs) from intrapulmonary metastases (IPMs), looking for the most distinctive histologic features. An international panel of lung pathologists reviewed a scanned sequential cohort of 126 tumors from 48 patients and recorded an agreed set of histologic features, including tumor typing and predominant pattern of adenocarcinoma, thereby opining whether the case was SPLC, IPM, or a combination thereof. Cohen κ statistics of 0.60 on overall assessment of SPLC or IPM indicated a good agreement. Likewise, there was good agreement (κ score 0.64, p < 0.0001) between WHO histologic pattern in individual cases and SPLC or IPM status, but the proportions diversified for histologic pattern and SPLC or IPM status (McNemar test, p < 0.0001). The strongest associations for distinguishing between SPLC and IPM were observed for nuclear pleomorphism, cell size, acinus formation, nucleolar size, mitotic rate, nuclear inclusions, intraalveolar clusters, and necrosis. Conversely, the associations for lymphocytosis, mucin content, lepidic growth, vascular invasion, macrophage response, clear cell change, acute inflammation keratinization, and emperipolesis did not reach significance with tumor extent. Comprehensive histologic assessment is recommended for distinguishing SPLC from IPM with good reproducibility among lung pathologists. In addition to main histologic type and predominant patterns of histologic subtypes, nuclear pleomorphism, cell size, acinus formation, nucleolar size, and mitotic rate strongly correlate with pathologic staging status

The Use of Immunohistochemistry Improves the Diagnosis of Small Cell Lung Cancer and Its Differential Diagnosis. An International Reproducibility Study in a Demanding Set of Cases

Introduction The current WHO classification of lung cancer states that a diagnosis of SCLC can be reliably made on routine histological and cytological grounds but immunohistochemistry (IHC) may be required, particularly (1) in cases in which histologic features are equivocal and (2) in cases in which the pathologist wants to increase confidence in diagnosis. However, reproducibility studies based on hematoxylin and eosin–stained slides alone for SCLC versus large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) have shown pairwise κ scores ranging from 0.35 to 0.81. This study examines whether judicious use of IHC improves diagnostic reproducibility for SCLC. Methods Nineteen lung pathologists studied interactive digital images of 79 tumors, predominantly neuroendocrine lung tumors. Images of resection and biopsy specimens were used to make diagnoses solely on the basis of morphologic features (level 1), morphologic features along with requested IHC staining results (level 2), and all available IHC staining results (level 3). Results For the 19 pathologists reading all 79 cases, the rate of agreement for level 1 was 64.7%, and it increased to 73.2% and 77.5% in levels 2 and 3, respectively. With IHC, κ scores for four tumor categories (SCLC, LCNEC, carcinoid tumors, and other) increased in resection samples from 0.43 to 0.60 and in biopsy specimens from 0.43 to 0.64. Conclusions Diagnosis using hematoxylin and eosin staining alone showeds moderate agreement among pathologists in tumors with neuroendocrine morphology, but agreement improved to good in most cases with the judicious use of IHC, especially in the diagnosis of SCLC. An approach for IHC in the differential diagnosis of SCLC is provided

PD-L1 Testing for Lung Cancer in 2019: Perspective From the IASLC Pathology Committee

The recent development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has led to promising advances in the treatment of patients with NSCLC and SCLC with advanced or metastatic disease. Most ICIs target programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis with the aim of restoring antitumor immunity. Multiple clinical trials for ICIs have evaluated a predictive value of PD-L1 protein expression in tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating immune cells (ICs) by immunohistochemistry (IHC), for which different assays with specific IHC platforms were applied. Of those, some PD-L1 IHC assays have been validated for the prescription of the corresponding agent for first- or second-line treatment. However, not all laboratories are equipped with the dedicated platforms, and many laboratories have set up in-house or laboratory-developed tests that are more affordable than the generally expensive clinical trial–validated assays. Although PD-L1 IHC test is now deployed in most pathology laboratories, its appropriate implementation and interpretation are critical as a predictive biomarker and can be challenging owing to the multiple antibody clones and platforms or assays available and given the typically small size of samples provided. Because many articles have been published since the issue of the IASLC Atlas of PD-L1 Immunohistochemistry Testing in Lung Cancer, this review by the IASLC Pathology Committee provides updates on the indications of ICIs for lung cancer in 2019 and discusses important considerations on preanalytical, analytical, and postanalytical aspects of PD-L1 IHC testing, including specimen type, validation of assays, external quality assurance, and training