Abstract:Aims A common concern among pathologists scoring PD‐L1 immunohistochemical staining is interobserver and intraobserver variability. We assessed interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility of PD‐L1 scoring among trained pathologists using combined positive score (CPS; tumour cell and tumour‐associated immune cell staining). Methods and results Data were collected for 2 years (2017–2019) from 456 pathologists worldwide. Digital training encompassed unique, tumour‐specific training and test sets. Samples were stained using PD‐L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx and evaluated at specific CPS cut‐offs for gastric cancer (GC), cervical cancer (CC), urothelial cancer (UC), oesophageal cancer (OC), and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Pathologists underwent expert‐to‐peer training and scored 20 blinded samples on day 1 and 25 blinded samples on day 2 (including 15 of the day 1 samples). Interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility were assessed. For GC (120 observers) and CC (32 observers) samples assessed at CPS ≥1, average interobserver agreement was 91.5% and 91.0%, respectively, and average intraobserver agreement was 90.2% and 96.6%, respectively. For UC (139 observers) and OC (52 observers) samples measured at CPS ≥10, average interobserver agreement was 93.4% and 93.7%, respectively, and average intraobserver agreement was 92.0% and 92.5%, respectively. For HNSCC samples (113 observers), average interobserver agreement was 94.1% at CPS ≥1 and 86.5% at CPS ≥20; intraobserver agreement was 94.7% at CPS ≥1 and 90.5% at CPS ≥20. Conclusion The consistently high interobserver and intraobserver concordance rates support the effectiveness of face‐to‐face training of many global pathologists for scoring PD‐L1 CPS across multiple indications at several specific cut‐offs.

High interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility among pathologists assessing PD‐L1 CPS across multiple indications