Search

Context.—Although CD30 testing is an established tool in the diagnostic workup of lymphomas, it is also emerging as a predictive biomarker that informs treatment. The current definition of CD30 positivity by immunohistochemistry is descriptive and based on reactivity in lymphomas that are defined by their universal strong expression of CD30, rather than any established threshold. Challenges include inconsistencies with preanalytic variables, tissue processing, pathologist readout, and with the pathologist and oncologist interpretation of reported results.Objective.—To develop and propose general best practice recommendations for reporting CD30 expression by immunohistochemistry in lymphoma biopsies to harmonize practices across institutions and facilitate assessment of its significance in clinical decision-making.Design.—Following literature review and group discussion, the panel of 14 academic hematopathologists and 2 clinical/academic hematologists/oncologists divided into 3 working groups. Each working group was tasked with assessing CD30 testing by immunohistochemistry, CD30 expression readout, or CD30 expression interpretation.Results.—Panel recommendations were reviewed and discussed. An online survey was conducted to confirm the consensus recommendations.Conclusions.—CD30 immunohistochemistry is required for all patients in whom classic Hodgkin lymphoma and any lymphoma within the spectrum of peripheral T-cell lymphoma are differential diagnostic considerations. The panel reinforced and summarized that immunohistochemistry is the preferred methodology and any degree of CD30 expression should be reported. For diagnostic purposes, the interpretation of CD30 expression should follow published guidelines. To inform therapeutic decisions, report estimated percent positive expression in tumor cells (or total cells where applicable) and record descriptively if nontumor cells are positive.

Companion diagnostic immunohistochemistry (IHC) tests are developed and performed without incorporating the tools and principles of laboratory metrology. Basic analytic assay parameters such as lower limit of detection (LOD) and dynamic range are unknown to both assay developers and end users. We solved this problem by developing completely new tools for IHC-calibrators with units of measure traceable to National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) Standard Reference Material (SRM) 1934. In this study, we demonstrate the clinical impact and opportunity for incorporating these changes into PD-L1 testing. Forty-one laboratories in North America and Europe were surveyed with newly-developed PD-L1 calibrators. The survey sampled a broad representation of commercial and laboratory-developed tests (LDTs). Using the PD-L1 calibrators, we quantified analytic test parameters that were previously only inferred indirectly after large clinical studies. The data show that the four FDA-cleared PD-L1 assays represent three different levels of analytic sensitivity. The new analytic sensitivity data explain why some patients' tissue samples were positive by one assay and negative by another. The outcome depends on the assay's lower LOD. Also, why previous attempts to harmonize certain PD-L1 assays were unsuccessful; the assays' dynamic ranges were too disparate and did not overlap. PD-L1 assay calibration also clarifies the exact performance characteristics of LDTs relative to FDA-cleared commercial assays. Some LDTs' analytic response curves are indistinguishable from their predicate FDA-cleared assay. IHC assay calibration represents an important transition for companion diagnostic testing. The new tools will improve patient treatment stratification, test harmonization, and foster accuracy as tests transition from clinical trials to broad clinical use.

Patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring ROS proto-oncogene 1 (ROS1) gene rearrangements show dramatic response to the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) crizotinib. Current best practice guidelines recommend that all advanced stage non-squamous NSCLC patients be also tested for ROS1 gene rearrangements. Several studies have suggested that ROS1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) using the D4D6 antibody may be used to screen for ROS1 fusion positive lung cancers, with assays showing high sensitivity but moderate to high specificity. A break apart fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) test is then used to confirm the presence of ROS1 gene rearrangement. The goal of Canadian ROS1 (CROS) study was to harmonize ROS1 laboratory developed testing (LDT) by using IHC and FISH assays to detect ROS1 rearranged lung cancers across Canadian pathology laboratories. Cell lines expressing different levels of ROS1 (high, low, none) were used to calibrate IHC protocols after which participating laboratories ran the calibrated protocols on a reference set of 24 NSCLC cases (9 ROS1 rearranged tumors and 15 ROS1 non-rearranged tumors as determined by FISH). Results were compared using a centralized readout. The stained slides were evaluated for the cellular localization of staining, intensity of staining, the presence of staining in non-tumor cells, the presence of non-specific staining (e.g. necrosis, extracellular mater, other) and the percent positive cells. H-score was also determined for each tumor. Analytical sensitivity and specificity harmonization was achieved by using low limit of detection (LOD) as either any positivity in the U118 cell line or H-score of 200 with the HCC78 cell line. An overall diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of up to 100% and 99% respectively was achieved for ROS1 IHC testing (relative to FISH) using an adjusted H-score readout on the reference cases. This study confirms that LDT ROS1 IHC assays can be highly sensitive and specific for detection of ROS1 rearrangements in NSCLC. As NSCLC can demonstrate ROS1 IHC positivity in FISH-negative cases, the degree of the specificity of the IHC assay, especially in highly sensitive protocols, is mostly dependent on the readout cut-off threshold. As ROS1 IHC is a screening assay for a rare rearrangements in NSCLC, we recommend adjustment of the readout threshold in order to balance specificity, rather than decreasing the overall analytical and diagnostic sensitivity of the protocols.

While tumour mutation burden (TMB) is emerging as a possible biomarker for immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), methods for testing have not been standardised as yet. In April 2019, the International Quality Network for Pathology (IQN Path) launched a survey to assess the current practice of TMB testing. Of the 127 laboratories that replied, 69 (54.3%) had already introduced TMB analysis for research purposes and/or clinical applications. Fifty laboratories (72.5%) used targeted sequencing, although a number of different panels were employed. Most laboratories tested formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded material (94.2%), while 18/69 (26%) tested also cell-free DNA. Fifty-five laboratories used both single nucleotide variants and indels for TMB calculation; 20 centers included only non-synonymous variants. In conclusion, the data from this survey indicate that multiple global laboratories were capable of rapidly introducing routine clinical TMB testing. However, the variability of testing methods raises concerns about the reproducibility of results among centers. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00428-021-03093-7.

The Canadian NTRK (CANTRK) is a ring study to optimize testing for neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase (NTRK) fusions in Canadian laboratories. Sixteen diagnostic laboratories used next-generation sequencing (NGS) for NTRK1, NTRK2, or NTRK3 fusions. Each laboratory received 12 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples with unique NTRK fusions and two control non-NTRK fusion samples (one ALK and one ROS1). Laboratories used validated protocols for NGS fusion detection. Panels included Oncomine Comprehensive Assay v3, Oncomine Focus Assay, Oncomine Precision Assay, AmpliSeq for Illumina Focus, TruSight RNA Pan-Cancer Panel, FusionPlex Lung, and QIAseq Multimodal Lung. One sample was withdrawn from analysis because of sample quality issues. Of the remaining 13 samples, 6 of 11 NTRK fusions and both control fusions were detected by all laboratories. Two fusions, WNK2::NTRK2 and STRN3::NTRK2, were not detected by 10 laboratories using the Oncomine Comprehensive or Focus panels, due to absence of WNK2 and STRN3 in panel designs. Two fusions, TPM3::NTRK1 and LMNA::NTRK1, were challenging to detect on the AmpliSeq for Illumina Focus panel because of bioinformatics issues. One ETV6::NTRK3 fusion at low levels was not detected by two laboratories using the TruSight Pan-Cancer Panel. Panels detecting all fusions included FusionPlex Lung, Oncomine Precision, and QIAseq Multimodal Lung. The CANTRK study showed competency in detection of NTRK fusions by NGS across different panels in 16 Canadian laboratories and identified key test issues as targets for improvements.

In personalized medicine, predictive biomarker testing is the basis for an appropriate choice of therapy for patients with cancer. An important tool for laboratories to ensure accurate results is participation in external quality assurance (EQA) programs. Several providers offer predictive EQA programs for different cancer types, test methods, and sample types. In 2013, a guideline was published on the requirements for organizing high-quality EQA programs in molecular pathology. Now, after six years, steps were taken to further harmonize these EQA programs as an initiative by IQNPath ABSL, an umbrella organization founded by various EQA providers. This revision is based on current knowledge, adds recommendations for programs developed for predictive biomarkers by in situ methodologies (immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization), and emphasized transparency and an evidence-based approach. In addition, this updated version also has the aim to give an overview of current practices from various EQA providers. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00428-020-02928-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Traceability of measurement to a higher order reference standard is a foundation of laboratory testing. There is as yet no method for creating reference standards for cellular proteins in situ in an analogous fashion as for soluble analytes. At present, IHC laboratories produce results for breast cancer hormone receptors without connection to a reference standard. Not surprisingly, high rates of testing variation as well as discrepancies among IHC laboratories have been reported. To address this need, we developed a system of measurement traceability using a linked fluorescein tag for creating reference standards for any cellular analyte and, as a first test, validate it for estrogen receptor (ER) testing. In this study, the newly developed ER standard defines and compares the thresholds separating “high positive”, “low positive”, and “negative” tests according to updated ASCO/CAP guidelines as detected by clinical IHC laboratories in a national external quality assessment survey. This reference standard utilizes NIST Standard Reference Material (SRM) 1934 as a universal IHC standard. We calculated ER concentration based on a linked fluorescence measurement traceable to NIST SRM 1934 as each ER is linked to a single fluorescein, and fluorescein concentration equals ER concentration. Each laboratory’s lowest detected ER concentration (i.e. “limit of detection”, LOD) was compared to their results with 80 tumor samples enriched for triple negative breast cases. For the Canadian Immunohistochemistry Quality Control (CIQC) ER proficiency testing run, calibrator sets with peptides for the SP1, EP1, and 6F11 epitopes were created. The various concentrations were pipetted onto histology slides used by CIQC to place its 80-case breast cancer tissue microarray. These slides were stained by participating laboratories using their routine ER IHC protocols and returned to the CIQC. For the purpose of this study, Histology Score and ASCO/CAP categorical scoring recommendation was used for the readout. Results with SP1 clone are reported here because it was employed by overwhelming majority of laboratories. A total of 3,038 readouts were included in the analysis. Most IHC laboratories had a LOD between 10,000 – 25,000 molecules ER per microbead. Highly sensitive ER assays (low LODs) detected more positive cases while those with poorly sensitive assay detected fewer. The LOD correlated with the percent positive cases (R2= -.767, p < 0.0001, Spearman Correlation) as well as with cumulative individual laboratory Histology Score (R2= -.612, p < 0.0001, Spearman Correlation). The tumor samples accounting for this difference were principally “low positive” (ASCO/CAP classification) while ER-high positive tumors were less affected. Although the concept of a non-quantitative IHC LOD has been introduced with critical assay performance controls (iCAPCs, e.g. germinal center cells in the tonsil for ER), there were no tools until now to actually measure LOD for ER IHC testing. With the calibrators introduced here, it is now possible to measure the LOD for ER IHC assays. Furthermore, our data show that ER low positive and some cases of ER high positive breast cancers are highly affected by the variability of analytic sensitivity between clinical IHC laboratories. These data argue for the urgent need to standardize testing to a defined analytic sensitivity range, which is now possible for the first time. Beyond inter-laboratory standardization, known measured LOD also enables: i) methodology transfer from clinical trials to clinical laboratories; ii) determination of optimal analytical sensitivity to produce assays with highest clinical and analytical validity, and iii) daily monitoring of analytical sensitivity for each tested IHC slide. Citation Format: Emina Emilia Torlakovic, Seshi R. Sompuram, Kodela Vani, Lili Wang, Anika K Schaedle, Paul C. DeRose, Steven A. Bogen. Introduction and clinical validation of metrology standards for immunohistochemistry (IHC); New tool for standardization of estrogen receptor (ER) IHC assay in breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS5-46.

The tyrosine receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitors larotrectinib and entrectinib were recently approved in Canada for the treatment of solid tumours harbouring neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions. These NTRK gene fusions are oncogenic drivers found in most tumour types at a low frequency (80%) in a small number of rare tumours (e.g., secretory carcinoma of the salivary gland and of the breast). They are generally mutually exclusive of other common oncogenic drivers. Larotrectinib and entrectinib have demonstrated impressive overall response rates and tolerability in Phase I/II trials in patients with TRK fusion cancer with no other effective treatment options. Given the low frequency of TRK fusion cancer and the heterogeneous molecular testing landscape in Canada, identifying and optimally managing such patients represents a new challenge. We provide a Canadian consensus on when and how to test for NTRK gene fusions and when to consider treatment with a TRK inhibitor. We focus on five tumour types: thyroid carcinoma, colorectal carcinoma, non-small cell lung carcinoma, soft tissue sarcoma, and salivary gland carcinoma. Based on the probability of the tumour harbouring an NTRK gene fusion, we also suggest a tumour-agnostic consensus for NTRK gene fusion testing and treatment. We recommend considering a TRK inhibitor in all patients with TRK fusion cancer with no other effective treatment options.

PURPOSETo update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline.METHODSA multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature.RECOMMENDATIONSThe Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

Purpose.—To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline.Methods.—A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature.Recommendations.—The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Background Gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma is rare but the most common subtype of cervical adenocarcinoma not associated with human papillomavirus. It is more aggressive with a shorter five-year survival rate compared to human papillomavirus-associated usual type endocervical adenocarcinoma. The objectives of our study were to determine the incidence and clinical-pathological characteristics of Gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma in a single institution. Methods Twenty four cases of invasive cervical adenocarcinoma were identified between January 2000 and December 2015, from the Saskatoon Health Region pathology database using International Endocervical Adenocarcinoma Criteria and Classification to retrospectively classify endocervical adenocarcinoma. Immunohistochemistry was performed with antibodies for Gastric mucin-6 (MUC-6), p16INK4a, cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (p16), p53 protein (p53), estrogen and progesterone receptors. Clinical and pathological data was retrieved from pathology reports and charts. Statistical analysis was performed using Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-Square test. Results Using the International Endocervical Adenocarcinoma Criteria and Classification criteria, 19 cases (79.2%) were classified as human papillomavirus-associated usual type endocervical adenocarcinoma, and five cases (20.8%) as Gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma. In our study 40% of Gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma cases presented at stage III compared to none of the usual type endocervical carcinoma cases. All the Gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma cases were positive for MUC-6, and negative for p16. 60% Gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma cases demonstrated mutant type p53 staining. In contrast, 84.2% of human papillomavirus-associated usual type endocervical adenocarcinoma cases showed block like nuclear and cytoplasmic positivity with p16 antibodies. The Gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma group had significantly shorter median survival time than human papillomavirus-associated usual type endocervical adenocarcinoma group, Gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma is 22 months compared to human papillomavirus-associated usual type endocervical adenocarcinoma at 118 months (p = 0.043). Conclusions In this study, Gastric-type endocervical adenocarcinoma accounted for 20.8% of all cervical adenocarcinoma with higher stage at presentation and shorter overall survival. Criteria proposed by International Endocervical Adenocarcinoma Criteria and Classification (IECC) are simple and reproducible in differentiating between, HPV- associated (HPVA) and non HPV associated (NHPVA) endocervical adenocarcinoma. Although none of the IHC assays is specific for GAS, but p16, MUC-6, ER, PR and p53 may further aid in confirming GAS and to differentiate it from benign and malignant mimics.

Bone marrow stromal cells (BMSCs) are a key part of the hematopoietic niche. Mouse and human BMSCs are recognized by different markers (LepR and NGFR/CD271, respectively). However, there has not been a detailed in situ comparison of both populations within the hematopoietic microenvironment. Moreover, dog BMSCs have not been characterized in situ by any of those markers. We conducted a systematic histopathological comparison of mouse, human, and dog BMSCs within their bone marrow architecture and microenvironment. Human and dog CD271+ BMSCs had a morphology, frequency, and distribution within trabecular bone marrow similar to those of mouse LepR+ BMSCs. However, mouse bone marrow had higher cellularity and megakaryocyte content. In conclusion, highly comparable bone marrow mesenchymal stromal cell distribution among the three species establishes the validity of using mouse and dog as a surrogate experimental model of hematopoietic stem cell-BMSC interactions. However, the distinct differences in adipocyte and megakaryocyte microenvironment content of mouse bone marrow and how they might influence hematopoietic stem cell interactions as compared with humans require further study.

Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) is used as a biomarker for anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) or anti-PD-L1 immunotherapies in NSCLC. We report here the results of population-based PD-L1 testing using the 22C3 IHC pharmDx Assay (Agilent Technologies) in a large Canadian regional reference pathology laboratory.Testing was conducted reflexively on biopsies and resections for NSCLC during an 8-month period. Tumor proportion score (TPS) cutoffs for low and high expression were 1% and 50%, respectively.Altogether, 2031 PD-L1 tests were performed on specimens from 1795 patients, with 107 inconclusive results (5.3%). Excluding cases with inconclusive/missing data, proportions for the remaining 1713 patients were 41.6% for TPS less than 1%, 28.6% for TPS 1% to 49%, and 29.8% for TPS greater than or equal to 50%. Higher PD-L1 expression rates were noted in EGFR wild-type versus mutant tumors (p0.001), squamous versus adenocarcinoma (p0.001), and metastatic versus primary tumors (p0.001). PD-L1 among 103 patients with paired biopsy and resection specimens revealed moderate concordance (κ = 0.67). A total of 52% (25 of 48) of biopsies with TPS less than 1% had TPS greater than 1% in resection, whereas 84.6% (22 of 26) of biopsies with TPS greater than or equal to 50% were concordant in resected tumors. Discordance rates between biopsy and resection were 71.4% for biopsies with less than 8 mmIntratumoral heterogeneity of PD-L1 expression may result in misclassification of PD-L1 status in a substantial proportion of PD-L1-negative small biopsy samples. Biopsy of metastatic site may increase proportion of patients with high PD-L1 expression.

Background Immunoassays for protein analytes measured in situ support a $2 billion laboratory testing industry that suffers from significant interlaboratory disparities, affecting patient treatment. The root cause is that immunohistochemical testing lacks the generally accepted tools for analytic standardization, including reference standards and traceable units of measure. Until now, the creation of these tools has represented an insoluble technical hurdle. Methods We address the need with a new concept in metrology—that is, linked traceability. Rather than calculating analyte concentration directly, which has proven too variable, we calculate concentration by measuring an attached fluorescein, traceable to NIST Standard Reference Material 1934, a fluorescein standard. Results For validation, newly developed estrogen receptor (ER) calibrators were deployed in tandem with an array of 80 breast cancer tissue sections in a national external quality assessment program. Laboratory performance was assessed using both the ER standards and the tissue array. Similar to previous studies, the tissue array revealed substantial discrepancies in ER test results among the participating laboratories. The new ER calibrators revealed a broad range of analytic sensitivity, with the lower limits of detection ranging from 7310 to 74 790 molecules of ER. The data demonstrate, for the first time, that the variable test results correlate with analytic sensitivity, which can now be measured quantitatively. Conclusions The reference standard enables precise interlaboratory alignment of immunohistochemistry test sensitivity for measuring cellular proteins in situ. The introduction of a reference standard and traceable units of measure for protein expression marks an important milestone.

Introduction The programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) assay is used to select patients for first or second-line pembrolizumab monotherapy in NSCLC. The PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx assay requires an Autostainer Link 48 instrument. Laboratories without this stainer have the option to develop a highly accurate 22C3 IHC laboratory-developed test (LDT) on other instruments. The Canadian 22C3 IHC LDT validation project was initiated to harmonize the quality of PD-L1 22C3 IHC LDT protocols across 20 Canadian pathology laboratories. Methods Centrally optimized 22C3 LDT protocols were distributed to participating laboratories. The LDT results were assessed against results using reference PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx. Analytical sensitivity and specificity were assessed using cell lines with varying PD-L1 expression levels (phase 1) and IHC critical assay performance controls (phase 2B). Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were assessed using whole sections of 50 NSCLC cases (phase 2A) and tissue microarrays with an additional 50 NSCLC cases (phase 2C). Results In phase 1, 80% of participants reached acceptance criteria for analytical performance in the first attempt with disseminated protocols. However, in phase 2A, only 40% of participants reached the desired diagnostic accuracy for both 1% and 50% tumor proportion score cutoff. In phase 2B, further protocol modifications were conducted, which increased the number of successful laboratories to 75% in phase 2C. Conclusions It is possible to harmonize highly accurate 22C3 LDTs for both 1% and 50% tumor proportion score in NSCLC across many laboratories with different platforms. However, despite a centralized approach, diagnostic validation of predictive IHC LDTs can be challenging and not always successful.

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.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Since 2014, programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) checkpoint inhibitors have been approved by various regulatory agencies for the treatment of multiple cancers including melanoma, lung cancer, urothelial carcinoma, renal cell carcinoma, head and neck cancer, classical Hodgkin lymphoma, colorectal cancer, gastroesophageal cancer, hepatocellular cancer, and other solid tumors. Of these approved drug/disease combinations, a subset also has regulatory agency-approved, commercially available companion/complementary diagnostic assays that were clinically validated using data from their corresponding clinical trials. The objective of this document is to provide evidence-based guidance to assist clinical laboratories in establishing fit-for-purpose PD-L1 biomarker assays that can accurately identify patients with specific tumor types who may respond to specific approved immuno-oncology therapies targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint. These recommendations are issued as 38 Guideline Statements that address (i) assay development for surgical pathology and cytopathology specimens, (ii) reporting elements, and (iii) quality assurance (including validation/verification, internal quality assurance, and external quality assurance). The intent of this work is to provide recommendations that are relevant to any tumor type, are universally applicable and can be implemented by any clinical immunohistochemistry laboratory performing predictive PD-L1 immunohistochemistry testing.

There are two aspects of immunohistochemistry (IHC) that are relevant to practicing pathologist: (1) understanding of IHC biomarker panels that are suitable for diagnostic, prognostic and predictive testing, and (2) understanding of IHC quality assurance (QA), which makes sure that the tests in these panels work as they should. The two aspects are closely linked together and call for collaborative approach between pathologists and IHC laboratory technologists as both need to be involved in developing and maintaining IHC biomarkers that are "fit-for-purpose". This article reviews the most current IHC QA concepts that are imminently material to practicing pathologists with emphasis on challenges that are specific to endocrine pathology.

BACKGROUND. The challenges in accurate patient stratification for immune checkpoint inhibitors have been compounded by the fact that the FDA-cleared PD-L1 IHC tests are analytic ‘black boxes'. Relatively basic analytic parameters such as lower limit of detection and analytic dynamic range are unknown to both developers of assays as well as end users. The recent development of standardized PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) reference materials enables quantitative test characterizations that were not previously possible. METHODS. We surveyed 41 PD-L1 testing laboratories in North America and Europe, quantitatively defining each of the PD-L1 tests' analytic performance in terms of lower limit of detection and dynamic range. All four commercial PD-L1 kits were assessed by multiple laboratories. A variety of laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) we also assessed. The reference materials incorporated defined concentrations of PD-L1 peptide (intracellular domain) or recombinant extracellular domain protein, traceable to NIST Standard Reference Material 1934. Each laboratory received a slide with 10 separate PD-L1 calibrator concentrations: 2,200 - 600,000 molecules of PD-L1 extracellular domain or 34,000 - 2,200,000 molecules of PD-L1 intracellular domain. The calibrator concentrations ranged from those that are below the lower limit of detection to others that yield maximal staining. RESULTS. The data obtained with the four PD-L1 kits (VENTANA PD-L1 (SP263) Assay, VENTANA PD-L1 (SP142) Assay, DAKO PD-L1 IHC 28-8 pharmDx and DAKO PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx assays) revealed that the lower limits of detection (PD-L1 molecules per cell equivalent) are approximately: 50,000 - 180,000 (SP263), 800,000 - 1,200,000 (SP142), 220,000 - 360,000 (28-8), and 200,000 - 400,000 (22C3). The dynamic ranges for all of these tests are generally narrow, spanning less than a log concentration of PD-L1. The SP263 and SP142 assays showed no overlap of their analytic response curves. This means that a maximal stain intensity with SP263 kit can be associated with zero staining with the SP142 kit. Consequently, it is not possible to compensate for the variability in analytic sensitivity between these two tests by adjusting the percent positive cell cutoff. The 28-8 was more sensitive than, but statistically indistinguishable from the 22C3 assay. Laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) using these and other primary antibodies have their own unique analytic performance characteristics. CONCLUSIONS. The PD-L1 reference materials enable precise definitions of analytic test performance and linking them with clinical management thresholds. Therefore, this tool finds its most important implementation at the stage of development of new IHC predictive biomarkers in clinical trials as well as at the stage of methodology transfer to clinical IHC laboratories. Furthermore, our results also help define more precisely the possibility for assay interchangeability and to what degree the assays may be harmonized. Citation Format: Emina E. Torlakovic, Seshi Sompuram, Kodela Vani, Steve Bogen. Analysis of PD-L1 IHC tests using NIST SRM 1934-traceable reference materials: A new paradigm for development of predictive IHC biomarkers [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr LB034.

Appropriate controls are critical for the correct interpretation of immunohistochemistry (IHC) assays and help to detect unsuccessful/suboptimal slides. We performed an audit of slides that were designated as being "failed" by the IHC laboratory (ie, laboratory-failed slides) of a large North American oncology and transplant center. All slides were run with on-slide controls. The study included analysis of only those failed slides where staining of both internal and external controls were unsuccessful/suboptimal in a period of 65 days. Failed slides were categorized based on the reason why the laboratory failed the slides. The study compared frequencies of failed slides across 9 automated stainers from 2 manufacturers and between class 1 and class 2 biomarkers. Distinction between "failed slides" and "false-negative/false-positive tests" is emphasized. The study included 22,234 IHC slides in the study period. Of those, 452 (2%) were designated as "failed" by the laboratory. Class 1 and class 2 tests showed failure rates of 0.8% and 9%, respectively. The most frequent reason for failed slides on one platform related to "no or weak staining," whereas the other had more failed slides due to "high signal-to-noise ratio" (P

Background The presence of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement predicts response to ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was the initial reference standard to detect ALK rearrangement, but immunohistochemistry (IHC) using D5F3 has gained acceptance as an alternative diagnostic method. ALK IHC assays using other ALK antibodies have also been used as screening methods, but data supporting their utility as diagnostic tests have not been widely reported. Methods Data from reflexive clinical ALK IHC test using the 5A4 clone concurrent with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation testing were analyzed. ALK IHC results were reported as negative (-), equivocal, or positive (+), with equivocal or positive staining validated by FISH break-apart probe testing. Treatment outcomes were reviewed for ALK IHC+ patients. Results Between 2012 and 2015, 146 (2.5%) cases were reported as ALK IHC+, 188 (3.2%) were reported as equivocal, and 5624 (94.4%) were reported as ALK IHC-. Of the ALK IHC+ cases, 131/143(91.6%) were ALK FISH+. Excluding 6 cases in which FISH was inconclusive or not performed, the positive predictive value was 95.6%, and the negative predictive value was 100%. Most specimens (n = 5352 [89.6%]) were also successfully tested for EGFR. Clinical responses to ALK TKIs were noted in 49 ALK IHC+ patients, with a median progression-free survival of 9.9 months. Conclusions ALK 5A4 IHC can serve as a robust diagnostic test for ALK-rearranged lung cancer and is associated with treatment response and survival. Optimized tissue allocation resulted in high success rates of combined reflex EGFR and ALK testing.

PD-L1 testing by immunohistochemistry (IHC) has presented significant challenges not only for clinical laboratories, but also for external quality assurance (EQA) entities that provide proficiency testing (PT) for clinical laboratories. Canadian Immunohistochemistry Quality Control (CIQC) has used educational runs to explore approaches to sample design and analysis of results that would enhance patient safety. As PT for predictive biomarkers requires modeling at every level (design of the run, assessment of the run, and reporting of "pass" or "fail") based on "fit-for-purpose" principles, CIQC has applied those principles to PD-L1 PT runs. Each laboratory received unstained slides with TMA tissue cores from 104 randomly selected primary NSCLC and tonsil tissues to test with their current PD-L1 assay. Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity were calculated against designated gold standards based on the "3D" approach (drug-disease-diagnostic assay). Depending on the selection of fit-for-purpose gold standards and also on the selection of what was considered fit-for-purpose cut-off points, great variation in the performance (accuracy) of both companion/complementary diagnostic assays and laboratory developed tests was seen. "Fit-for-purpose" in PT for PD-L1 testing entails that the purpose(s) of each PT run is declared a priori, that the PT program has selected/designated purpose-specific gold standard results for the PT challenge, and that the PT materials for the PT run are designed and constructed to enable calculations of diagnostic accuracy.

Few studies describe the comprehensive immunophenotypic pattern of blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm (BPDCN) in the bone marrow and its treatment. This retrospective analysis evaluates the diagnostic flow cytometry (FCM) pattern and outcome of nine patients diagnosed with BPDCN. A four-tube 10-color FCM panel used for diagnosis of acute leukemia (AL), showed cells in the blast gate (CD45dim/low SSC) and were positive for CD4(bright), CD33(dim), CD56(heterogenous), CD123(bright), CD36, CD38, HLA-DR, CD71. Seven patients received front-line induction therapy with HyperCVAD with an overall response rate of 86%. Five of six responders underwent planned allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). For a median follow up of 13.3 months, the 1-year disease free survival and overall survival were 56 and 67%, respectively. An accurate diagnosis of BPDCN can be made by 10-color FCM using a four-tube AL panel demonstrating a characteristic pattern of antigen expression. Front-line induction chemotherapy with HyperCVAD can yield high remission rates, but allo-HCT is required for long-term durable remissions.

OBJECTIVES: The occurrence of uneven staining (UES) in automated immunohistochemistry (IHC) has been experienced by clinical laboratories and has the potential to confound readout, interpretation, and reporting of IHC assays despite the presence optimally stained on-slide controls. However, there are no studies of this phenomenon in regard to the type, frequency, and association with different automated IHC platforms. We studied the occurrence of UES in automated IHC assays with real world examples from clinical practice and by using a laboratory developed methodology to monitor baseline and periodic performance of automated IHC instruments.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sections of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded normal liver tissue were mounted on 180 glass slides and stained for HepPar1 on 6 automated IHC instruments (4 different models from 3 different manufacturers). Macroscopic and microscopic defects of staining were recorded.RESULTS: Only 8% of slides showed completely uniform staining. UES, including areas of both increased and decreased staining, occurred with all instruments. Decreased staining was often zonal, involving large regions of the slide. Decreased staining mostly localized in an instrument-dependent manner. Increased staining tended to occur in small foci with a random distribution.CONCLUSIONS: The common occurrence of UES (particularly decreased staining) has important implications for the reliable read-out of IHC assays on biopsy samples. Baseline and periodic quality assurance testing for UES is recommended for all automated IHC instruments.

Bone marrow (BM) tissue biopsy evaluation, including trephine biopsy and clot section, is an integral part of BM investigation and is often followed by ancillary studies, in particular immunohistochemistry (IHC). IHC provides in situ coupling of morphological assessment and immunophenotype. The number of different IHC tests that can be applied to BM trephine biopsies and the number of indications for IHC testing is increasing concurrently with the development of flow cytometry and molecular diagnostic methods. An international Working Party for the Standardization of Bone Marrow IHC was formed by the International Council for Standardization in Hematology (ICSH) to prepare a set of guidelines for the standardization of BM IHC based on currently available published evidence and modern understanding of quality assurance principles as applied to IHC in general. The guidelines were discussed at the ICSH General Assemblies and reviewed by an international panel of experts to achieve further consensus and represent further development of the previously published ICSH guidelines for the standardization of BM specimens handling and reports.

Pathologists provide diagnoses relevant to the disease state of the patient and identify specific tissue characteristics relevant to response to therapy and prognosis. As personalized medicine evolves, there is a trend for increased demand of tissue-derived parameters. Pathologists perform increasingly complex analyses on the same 'cases'. Traditional methods of workload assessment and reimbursement, based on number of cases sometimes with a modifier (eg, the relative value unit (RVU) system used in the United States), often grossly underestimate the amount of work needed for complex cases and may overvalue simple, small biopsy cases. We describe a new approach to pathologist workload measurement that aligns with this new practice paradigm. Our multisite institution with geographically diverse partner institutions has developed the Automatable Activity-Based Approach to Complexity Unit Scoring (AABACUS) model that captures pathologists' clinical activities from parameters documented in departmental laboratory information systems (LISs). The model's algorithm includes: 'capture', 'export', 'identify', 'count', 'score', 'attribute', 'filter', and 'assess filtered results'. Captured data include specimen acquisition, handling, analysis, and reporting activities. Activities were counted and complexity units (CUs) generated using a complexity factor for each activity. CUs were compared between institutions, practice groups, and practice types and evaluated over a 5-year period (2008-2012). The annual load of a clinical service pathologist, irrespective of subspecialty, was ∼40,000 CUs using relative benchmarking. The model detected changing practice patterns and was appropriate for monitoring clinical workload for anatomical pathology, neuropathology, and hematopathology in academic and community settings, and encompassing subspecialty and generalist practices. AABACUS is objective, can be integrated with an LIS and automated, is reproducible, backwards compatible, and future adaptable. It can be applied as a robust decision support tool for the assessment of overall and targeted staffing needs as well as utilization analyses for resource allocation.

Immunohistochemical (IHC) testing for HER2/neu is becoming the standard of care for guiding adjuvant treatment of gastric carcinoma with trastuzumab.To assess interlaboratory variation in IHC staining and interpretation across multiple laboratories.A tissue microarray consisting of 45 cores from 28 gastric cancers was distributed to 37 laboratories for HER2/neu assessment. The IHC results were compared against expert scores at an academic institution and correlated with in situ hybridization results from the originating specimen. Interlaboratory agreement was calculated using Cohen κ statistic.The survey demonstrated several variations in IHC methods, including the primary antibodies in use. There was excellent agreement among laboratories in HER2/neu(+) (IHC 3(+)) cases (κ = 0.80 ± 0.01) and very good agreement among laboratories in HER2/neu(-) (IHC 0 or 1(+)) cases (κ = 0.58 ± 0.01). Less agreement was observed among laboratories when scoring equivocal (IHC 2(+)) cases (κ = 0.22 ± 0.01). Sensitivity and specificity of HER2/neu IHC were 99% and 100%, respectively, when measured against expert review and consensus score as a reference standard.There is substantial interlaboratory agreement in the interpretation of HER2/neu IHC despite variability in protocols. Although HER2/neu IHC is a highly sensitive and specific test, primary antibody selection may significantly affect IHC results. Furthermore, gastric tumors require a unique scoring system and expertise in interpretation. Intratumoral heterogeneity has a significant effect on HER2/neu scoring by IHC. Ongoing quality assurance exercises among laboratories will help ensure optimized HER2/neu testing.

Objectives: Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded unstained archived diagnostic tissue sections are frequently exchanged between clinical laboratories for immunohistochemical staining. The manner in which such sections are prepared represents a type of preanalytical variable that must be taken into account given the growing importance of immunohistochemical assays, especially predictive and prognostic tests, in personalized medicine. Methods: Recommendations were derived from review of the literature and expert consensus of the Canadian Association of Pathologists–Association canadienne des pathologists National Standards Committee for High Complexity Testing/Immunohistochemistry. Results: Relevant considerations include the type of glass slide on which to mount the unstained sections; the thickness of the tissue sections; the time from slide preparation to testing; the environment, particularly the temperature at which the unstained sections will be maintained prior to testing; the inclusion of on-slide positive control tissue where possible; and whether patient identifier(s) should be included on slide labels. Conclusions: Clear communication between requesting and releasing laboratories will facilitate the proper preparation of unstained sections and also ensure that applicable privacy considerations are addressed.

The immune system plays a critical and complex role in the pathobiology of spinal cord injury (SCI), exerting both beneficial and detrimental effects. Increasing evidence suggests that there are injury level-dependent differences in the immune response to SCI. Patients with traumatic SCI have elevated levels of circulating autoantibodies against components of the central nervous system, but the role of these antibodies in SCI outcomes remains unknown. In rodent models of mid-thoracic SCI, antibody-mediated autoimmunity appears to be detrimental to recovery. However, whether autoantibodies against the spinal cord are generated following cervical SCI (cSCI), the most common level of injury in humans, remains undetermined. To address this knowledge gap, we investigated the antibody responses following cSCI in a rat model of injury. We found increased immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgM antibodies in the spinal cord in the subacute phase of injury (2 weeks), but not in more chronic phases (10 and 20 weeks). At 2 weeks post-cSCI, antibodies were detected at the injury epicenter and co-localized with the astroglial scar and neurons of the ventral horn. These increased levels of antibodies corresponded with enhanced activation of immune responses in the spleen. Higher counts of antibody-secreting cells were observed in the spleen of injured rats. Further, increased levels of secreted IgG antibodies and enhanced proliferation of T-cells in splenocyte cultures from injured rats were found. These findings suggest the potential development of autoantibody responses following cSCI in the rat. The impact of the post-traumatic antibody responses on functional outcomes of cSCI is a critical topic that requires further investigation.

Contains fulltext : 173083.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) All laboratory tests have test performance characteristics (TPCs), whether or not they are explicitly known to the laboratorian or the pathologist. TPCs are thus also an integral characteristic of immunohistochemistry (IHC) tests and other in situ, cell-based molecular assays such as DNA or RNA in situ hybridization or aptamer-based testing. Because of their descriptive, in situ, cell-based nature, IHC tests have a limited repertoire of appropriate TPCs. Although only a few TPCs are relevant to IHC, proper selection of informative TPCs is nonetheless essential for the development of and adherence to appropriate quality assurance measures in the IHC laboratory. This paper describes the TPCs that are relevant to IHC testing and emphasizes the role of TPCs in the validation of IHC tests. This is part 2 of the 4-part series "Evolution of Quality Assurance for Clinical Immunohistochemistry in the Era of Precision Medicine."

Contains fulltext : 173020.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Technical progress in immunohistochemistry (IHC) as well as the increased utility of IHC for biomarker testing in precision medicine avails us of the opportunity to reassess clinical IHC as a laboratory test and its proper characterization as a special type of immunoassay. IHC, as used in current clinical applications, is a descriptive, qualitative, cell-based, usually nonlinear, in situ protein immunoassay, for which the readout of the results is principally performed by pathologists rather than by the instruments on which the immunoassay is performed. This modus operandi is in contrast to other assays where the instrument also performs the readout of the test result (eg, nephelometry readers, mass spectrometry readers, etc.). The readouts (results) of IHC tests are used either by pathologists for diagnostic purposes or by treating physicians (eg, oncologists) for patient management decisions, the need for further testing, or follow-up. This paper highlights the distinction between the original purpose for which an IHC test is developed and its subsequent clinical uses, as well as the role of pathologists in the analytical and postanalytical phases of IHC testing. This paper is the first of a 4-part series, under the general title of "Evolution of Quality Assurance for Clinical Immunohistochemistry in the Era of Precision Medicine."

Cavitating mesenteric lymph node syndrome (CMLNS) is an infrequently reported manifestation of unrecognized/longstanding celiac disease and may be associated with enteropathy-associated intestinal T-cell lymphoma and hyposplenism. Unrecognized malignancy and life-threatening infections can pose a significant risk to patients in cases of delayed diagnosis. Fine-needle aspiration of the mesenteric lesions may contribute significantly to the correct diagnosis and can expedite patient management. We report on the cytologic characteristics of enteropathy-associated intestinal T-cell lymphoma first detected in a cyst fluid specimen obtained from a patient with cavitating mesenteric lesions. Image-guided fine-needle aspiration resulted in chylous fluid that contained a lymphoid cell population with neoplastic morphology and abnormal immunophenotype. Further work-up led to the diagnosis of enteropathy-associated intestinal T-cell lymphoma with bone marrow involvement. Cytologic assessment of the cyst fluid is an important part of the diagnostic cascade in patients with CMLNS to exclude clinically occult lymphoma. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2015;43:125–130. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

There are two broad classes (or categories) of excised human tissue: diagnostic tissue (DT) and research tissue (RT). Classification of excised human tissue does not define its ultimate use and ultimate use of excised human tissue does not define its classification. While both DT and RT can be used for research, DT has specific requirements with respect to how it must be handled if and when being accessed for research. We highlight distinguishing features of DT: (1) it is a clinical record, (2) it must be identifiable to a specific individual, (3) it is stewarded by pathology departments/clinical laboratories and (4) it has a mandatory retention period. We discuss how the further sub-classification of DT into archived DT (aDT) and excess DT (eDT) impacts the nature of its role in research. We examine the concept of DT as a clinical record and emphasize the impact of mandatory retention as it applies to how DT may be accessed for research purposes. We explain the role of post-retention eDT as a source of RT as well as procedures for access to in-retention aDT for research. Clarity of such issues will facilitate responsible access to DT for research.

The numbers of diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive immunohistochemistry (IHC) tests are increasing; the implementation and validation of new IHC tests, revalidation of existing tests, as well as the on-going need for daily quality assurance monitoring present significant challenges to clinical laboratories. There is a need for proper quality tools, specifically tissue tools that will enable laboratories to successfully carry out these processes. This paper clarifies, through the lens of laboratory tissue tools, how validation, verification, and revalidation of IHC tests can be performed in order to develop and maintain high quality "fit-for-purpose" IHC testing in the era of precision medicine. This is the final part of the 4-part series "Evolution of Quality Assurance for Clinical Immunohistochemistry in the Era of Precision Medicine."

Most reports on antibodies that claimed to separate mesothelioma from pulmonary adenocarcinoma originated from academic centers or specialized immunohistochemistry laboratories, but little is known about how such stains perform in general practice laboratories. The Canadian Immunohistochemistry Quality Control program circulates tissue array slides to laboratories across Canada; these are stained and then interpreted by the local laboratory and by a set of experienced reviewers. For Canadian Immunohistochemistry Quality Control run 16, tissue array slides from 16 pulmonary adenocarcinomas and 6 mesotheliomas were stained in 36 different laboratories for CEA, CD15, CK5/6, and calretinin. A total of 736 results (cores) were interpretable. If 3 of 4 staining results concordant with the diagnosis was accepted as definitive, 166/192 (86.4%) mesothelioma cores and 461/544 (84.7%) adenocarcinoma cores were correctly diagnosed. However, if 4 of 4 concordant markers were required, then 93/192 (48.4%) mesothelioma cores and 265/544 (48.7%) adenocarcinoma cores were correctly diagnosed. Only 3/192 (1.6%) mesothelioma cores were incorrectly classified as carcinomas and 8/544 (1.5%) of adenocarcinoma cores incorrectly classified as mesotheliomas on the basis of the immunoprofile (ie, 3 of 4 or 4 of 4 marker results were discordant with the diagnosis). We conclude that, in a study based on results from nonspecialized laboratories, the combination of CEA, CD15, calretinin, and CK5/6, used as a panel, has a very low false-positive rate when separating pulmonary adenocarcinomas from mesotheliomas; however, single negative or incorrect results are common, therefore the panel is only useful diagnostically if 3 of 4 correct results are deemed acceptable for diagnosis.

Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLD) are the second most frequent neoplasia in transplant patients after skin carcinomas. They occur following both solid organ transplants (SOT) and haematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCT). Most PTLD in solid organ recipients are of host origin, whereas in HSCT recipients they are most often of donor origin. The EBV status of the recipient and the donor, the type of transplant, the type of immunosuppressive therapy used, and the time after transplant are all important parameters that have been associated with the incidence and the type of PTLD. Although most PTLD are B-cell lesions up to 15% may be T-cell or NK-cell type. Most PTLD are associated with EBV, but EBV-negative PTLD are also clearly recognized. In the 2008 WHO classification of lymphoid neoplasms (ref) PTLD are subclassified according to their histological and immunophenotypic characteristics into early lesions, polymorphic type, monomorphic type, and classical Hodgkin lymphoma-type. Overall PTLD mortality rates are around 50%, but new therapies that include early treatment with rituximab and novel anti-EBV therapies promise better outcomes.

BACKGROUND The mismatch repair (MMR) status of tumors is being increasingly recognized as a prognostic, predictive, and possible germline predisposition/Lynch syndrome (LS) biomarker in colorectal cancer and other cancer types, particularly in endometrial cancer. Current methods (clinical history and tumor morphology) to predict MMR deficiency (dMMR) are suboptimal, and implementation of reflex laboratory testing of appropriate tumors has been recommended, a strategy requiring test standardization and clinical coordination. METHODS Two web-based questionnaires were administered, a general and a specialist laboratory questionnaire, to establish the availability of such tests, requisite clinical/pathology integration, current mode of test initiation, reporting and recommendation practices, and education and attitudes among pathologists. Technical aspects were reviewed on the basis of specialist laboratory practice. RESULTS Of 76 respondents, 21.5% were unaware or were uncertain whether they had access to MMR immunohistochemistry. Although 78.9% of respondents had access to such testing, an integrated approach to the identification of patients with LS is lacking, being limited to just 9 centers. The majority (70%) of testing is clinician initiated, with variable implementation of reflex testing and divergent practices in recommendation to test. Standardized reporting is lacking in many centers. Education on MMR in endometrial cancer is poor compared with that in colorectal cancer (P

Few studies describe the comprehensive immunophenotypic pattern of blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm (BPDCN) in the bone marrow and its treatment. This retrospective analysis evaluates the diagnostic flow cytometry (FCM) pattern and outcome of nine patients diagnosed with BPDCN. A four-tube 10-color FCM panel used for diagnosis of acute leukemia (AL), showed cells in the blast gate (CD45dim/low SSC) and were positive for CD4(bright), CD33(dim), CD56(heterogenous), CD123(bright), CD36, CD38, HLA-DR, CD71. Seven patients received front-line induction therapy with HyperCVAD with an overall response rate of 86%. Five of six responders underwent planned allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). For a median follow up of 13.3 months, the 1-year disease free survival and overall survival were 56 and 67%, respectively. An accurate diagnosis of BPDCN can be made by 10-color FCM using a four-tube AL panel demonstrating a characteristic pattern of antigen expression. Front-line induction chemotherapy with HyperCVAD can yield high remission rates, but allo-HCT is required for long-term durable remissions.

Intrachromosomal rearrangements involving the ALK gene are found in 3% to 5% of non-small cell lung cancers. Crizotinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that has been shown to prolong progression-free survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer harboring ALK gene rearrangements. In Canada, ALK immunohistochemistry (IHC) is used as a screening test before confirmation by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Canadian Immunohistochemistry Quality Control (CIQC) provides ALK (Lung Cancer) proficiency testing (PT) for Canadian IHC laboratories. Samples included 32 previously characterized cases (IHC and FISH) either from the Canadian ALK (CALK) project or from CIQC reference laboratories. The same design was used for both runs. A total of 20 laboratories participated in Run 1 and 22 in Run 2. Some laboratories participated in the anticipation of future need and used the PT exercise as a part of test development and validation. Results of the IHC testing were first self-reported using the CIQC TMA Scorer and then evaluated by expert assessment. FISH results were self-reported only. Participants also reported details about IHC and FISH protocols. The κ-values were calculated, for which values >0.80 were used as acceptable results, respectively. The pass rate between the 2 runs and between different primary antibodies were compared. Six of the 22 protocols (27%) in Run 1 and 15 of the 22 (68%) protocols in Run 2 passed the CIQC PT criteria for IHC testing. The increase in the pass rate for Run 2 was significant (P=0.03, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). All reported FISH results were correct. CALK laboratories had significantly higher κ-values than non-CALK laboratories (P=0.002, t test). PT for IHC for rare diseases such as ALK-positive lung cancer is feasible, but challenging. The academic nature of the CIQC program and collaboration on a national level facilitated the development of appropriate PT samples. Participating laboratories made use of the PT exercise either to confirm that their testing was properly calibrated or to improve their protocols, which was confirmed by the achievement of significantly better results in Run 2. They also used CIQC's PT program for new test development and optimization.

AimsPan-cytokeratin (pan-CK) and low molecular weight cytokeratin (LMWCK) tests are the most common immunohistochemistry (IHC) tests used to support evidence of epithelial differentiation. Canadian Immunohistochemistry Quality Control (CIQC), a new provider of proficiency testing for Canadian clinical IHC laboratories, has evaluated the performance of Canadian IHC laboratories in two proficiency testing challenges for both pan-CK and LMWCK.MethodsCIQC has designed a 70-sample tissue microarray (TMA) for challenge 1 and a 30-sample TMA for challenge 2. There were 13 participants in challenge 1, and 62 in challenge 2. All results were evaluated and scored by CIQC assessors and compared with reference laboratory results.ResultsParticipating laboratories often produced false-negative results that ranged from 20% to 80%. False-positive results were also detected. About half of participating clinical laboratories have inappropriately calibrated IHC tests for pan-CK and LMWCK, which are the most commonly used markers for demonstration of epithelial differentiation. The great majority of laboratories were not aware of the problem with calibration of pan-CK and LMWCK tests because of inappropriate selection of external positive controls and samples for optimisation of these tests. Benign liver and kidney are the most important tissues to include as positive controls for both pan-CK and LMWCK.ConclusionsParticipation in external quality assurance is important for peer comparison and proper calibration of IHC tests, which is also helpful for appropriate selection of positive control material and material for optimisation of the tests.