Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of Four PD-L1 Immunohistochemical Assays in Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Four different programmed death ligand 1 immunohistochemical assays are approved or in development as companion or complementary diagnostics to different immunotherapeutic agents in lung carcinoma. We sought to determine whether these assays are technically equivalent and whether one antibody can be used on an alternate staining platform.

METHODS: Serial sections of tissue microarrays constructed from 368 cases of resected lung cancer were stained for 22C3 and 28-8 on the Dako Link 48 platform (Dako, Carpinteria, Ca) and for SP142 and SP263 on the Ventana Benchmark Ultra platform (Ventana Medical Systems, Tucson, AZ) strictly as per product insert. A protocol was developed to use the 22C3 antibody on the Ventana Benchmark Ultra platform.

RESULTS: Differences in mean tumor cell and immune cell staining were observed between the four assays (p < 0.001). Differences between 22C3 and 28-8 were not statistically significant. Concordance of tumor cell scores was good (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.674), particularly when SP142 was excluded as an outlier (ICC = 0.755). The highest concordance was seen between 22C3 and 28-8 (ICC = 0.812). Concordance was poor for immune cell staining (ICC = 0.212). When dichotomized according to clinically relevant cutoffs, pairwise comparisons showed poor to moderate concordance (κ = 0.196-0.578), with positive percent agreement ranging from 15.1% to 90.0%. The 22C3 antibody performed comparably on the Dako Link 48 platform and the alternate Ventana Benchmark Ultra platform (ICC = 0.921, κ = 0.897).

CONCLUSIONS: Concordance between the four programmed death ligand 1 immunohistochemical assays when performed and scored as intended show that apart from 28-8 and 22C3, they cannot be used interchangeably in clinical practice. A protocol was successfully developed to use 22C3 on an alternate platform, which may help to overcome some barriers to implementation.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app