PD-L1 Assay Concordance in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma and Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma

Landon C Brown,Jason Zhu,Matthew K Labriola,Yuan Wu,Sachica Cheris,Xin Liu,Kathryn Perkinson,Zuowei Su,Shannon McCall,Jiaoti Huang,Wen-Chi Foo,Rajan T Gupta,Andrew J Armstrong,Daniel J George,Michael R Harrison,Tian Zhang,Landon C. Brown,Matthew K. Labriola,Rajan T. Gupta,Andrew J. Armstrong,Daniel J. George,Michael R. Harrison
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2020.03.020
IF: 3.121
2020-12-01
Clinical Genitourinary Cancer
Abstract:<h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Background</h3><p>Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are now standard of care for many patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Given real-world limitations in PD-L1 testing, concordance studies between PD-L1 assays are needed. We undertook comparisons of Dako 28–8 and Ventana SP142 assays in mRCC and Dako 22C3 and Ventana SP263 assays in mUC.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Patients and Methods</h3><p>32 patients with mRCC and 18 patients with mUC who had received ICI therapy were identified. FFPE tumor samples for patients with mRCC were evaluated with Dako 28–8 and Ventana SP142 PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) assays. For patients with mUC, FFPE tumor samples were evaluated with Dako 22C3 and Ventana SP263 PD-L1 IHC assays.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Results</h3><p>The majority of mRCC cases (29/32, 91%) were concordant between assays. The majority of mUC cases (17/18, 94%) were also concordant between assays.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Conclusions</h3><p>There was strong concordance between PD-L1 assays chosen for comparison in both mRCC and mUC, with similar performance characteristics. One limitation is the small number of cases in this study; larger comparison studies are needed for this biomarker in mRCC and mUC.</p>
oncology,urology & nephrology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?