| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Karlsson, Anna, et al.
(författare)
-
Gene Expression Profiling of Large Cell Lung Cancer Links Transcriptional Phenotypes to the New Histological WHO 2015 Classification
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Thoracic Oncology. - : ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. - 1556-0864 .- 1556-1380. ; 12:8, s. 1257-1267
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: Large cell lung cancer (LCLC) and large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) constitute a small proportion of NSCLC. The WHO 2015 classification guidelines changed the definition of the debated histological subtype LCLC to be based on immunomarkers for adenocarcinoma and squamous cancer. We sought to determine whether these new guidelines also translate into the transcriptional landscape of lung cancer, and LCLC specifically.Methods: Gene expression profiling was performed by using Illumina V4 HT12 microarrays (Illumina, San Diego, CA) on samples from 159 cases (comprising all histological subtypes, including 10 classified as LCLC WHO 2015 and 14 classified as LCNEC according to the WHO 2015 guidelines), with complimentary mutational and immunohistochemical data. Derived transcriptional phenotypes were validated in 199 independent tumors, including six WHO 2015 LCLCs and five LCNECs.Results: Unsupervised analysis of gene expression data identified a phenotype comprising 90% of WHO 2015 LCLC tumors, with characteristics of poorly differentiated proliferatiVe cancer, a 90% tumor protein p53 gene (TP53) mutation rate, and lack of well-known NSCLC oncogene driver alterations. Validation in independent data confirmed aggregation of WHO 2015 LCLCs in the specific phenotype. For LCNEC tumors, the unsupervised gene expression analysis suggested two different transcriptional patterns corresponding to a proposed genetic division of LCNEC tumors into SCLC-like and NSCLC-like cancer on the basis of TP53 and retinoblastoma 1 gene (RB1) alteration patterns.Conclusions: Refined classification of LCLC has implications for diagnosis, prognostics, and therapy decisions. Our molecular analyses support the WHO 2015 classification of LCLC and LCNEC tumors, which herein follow different tumorigenic paths and can accordingly be stratified into different transcriptional subgroups, thus linking diagnostic immunohistochemical staining driven classification with the transcriptional landscape of lung cancer.
|
|
| 6. |
- Kerr, Keith M, et al.
(författare)
-
Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Immunohistochemistry in Lung Cancer : In what state is this art?
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Journal of Thoracic Oncology. - 1556-0864 .- 1556-1380. ; 10:7, s. 985-989
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Therapeutic antibodies to programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1) and its ligand PD-L1 show promising clinical results. Anti-PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) may be a biomarker to select patients more likely to respond to these treatments. However, the development of at least four different therapeutics, each with a different anti-PD-L1 IHC assay, has raised concerns among pathologists and oncologists alike. This article reviews existing data on the IHC biomarker aspects of studies using these drugs in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and considers the challenges ahead, should these drug/IHC assay combinations reach routine practice. For each the known biomarker assays in development, there is a different monoclonal IHC antibody clone, produced by one of two diagnostics companies. Each test requires proprietary staining platforms and uses different definitions of a "positive" test for PD-L1 expression, on tumor cells and, in one test, also on tumor infiltrating immune cells. There are still considerable gaps in our knowledge of the technical aspects of these tests, and of the biological implications and associations of PD-L1 expression in NSCLC, considering heterogeneity of expression, dynamic changes in expression, and prognostic implications among other factors. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Pathology Committee raises the prospect of trying not only to harmonize and standardize testing for PD-L1 by IHC, at least at a technical level, but also, ideally, as a predictive marker, to facilitate availability of this test and a promising treatment for patients with NSCLC.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Lantuejoul, Sylvie, et al.
(författare)
-
PD-L1 Testing for Lung Cancer in 2019 : Perspective From the IASLC Pathology Committee
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of Thoracic Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1556-0864 .- 1556-1380. ; 15:4, s. 499-519
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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.
|
|
