Search

Many promising results were obtained by using anti-programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) or anti-programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) therapy in different tumor types, and several PD-1/PD-L1 blocking agents are already approved by [...], * Context.--The benefit of programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) as a method to select patients who may benefit from programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 immunotherapies remains uncertain in many tumor indications. Objectives.--To compare the commercially available, approved PD-L1 IHC assays (22C3, 28-8, SP142, SP263), specifically identifying the changes in staining output created by altering the detection method. Design.--This pilot study investigates the respective PD-L1 kit assay staining patterns and related scoring of tumor cells and immune cells on lung carcinoma and melanoma. Furthermore, the influence of the detection method (platform and related reagents) on PD-L1 antibody performance is studied. Results.--The SP142 kit reveals more immune cell staining but less tumor cell staining than the other PD-L1 kits. Alternatively, the 22C3 and 28-8 kits show good tumor cell sensitivity, but less pronounced immune cell staining, even in tonsil. Tumor cell staining by the SP263 kit is comparable to that of 22C3 and 28-8 kits, while immune cell staining is better. Strikingly, the selection of the detection method has a major impact on the sensitivity of the assay for PD-L1 detection per cell type. Switching the detection method of the kits could largely circumvent the observed staining differences. Conclusions.--The diverse sensitivities caused by the choice of the detection method should be taken into consideration when selecting PD-L1 kits or developing PD-L1 IHC laboratory-developed tests. When using alternative kits or laboratory-developed tests, it is strongly recommended to reestablish their clinical utility per therapeutic agent or compare them with the original kit. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2017-0159-OA