Immunohistochemical assessment of PD-L1 expression using three different monoclonal antibodies in triple negative breast cancer patients.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: PD-L1 receptor expression in breast cancer tissue can be assessed with different anti-human PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies. The performance of three specific monoclonal antibodies in a head-to-head comparison is unknown. In addition, a potential correlation of PD-L1 expression and clinico-pathological parameters has not been investigated. METHODS: This was a retrospective study on tissue samples of patients with histologically confirmed triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). PD-L1 receptors were immune histochemically stained with three anti-human PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies 22C3 and 28-8 for staining of tumor cell membranes (TC) and cytoplasm (Cyt), SP142 for immune cell staining (IC). Three different tissue samples of each patient were evaluated separately by two observers in a blinded fashion. The percentage of PD-L1 positive tumor cells in relation to the total number of tumor cells was determined. For antibodies 22C3 and 28-8 PD-L1 staining of 0 to < 1% of tumor cells was rated "negative", 1-50% was rated "positive" and > 50% was rated "strong positive". Cyt staining was defined as "negative" when no signal was observed and as "positive", when any positive signal was observed. For IC staining with SP142 all samples with PD-L1 expression ≥ 1% were rated as "positive". Finally, the relationship between PD-L1 expression and clinico-pathological parameters was analyzed. RESULTS: Tissue samples from 59 of 60 enrolled patients could be analyzed. Mean age was 55 years. Both the monoclonal antibodies 22C3 and 28-8 had similar properties, and were positive for both TC in 13 patients (22%) and for Cyt staining in 24 patients (40.7%). IC staining with antibody SP142 was positive in 24 patients (40.7%), who were also positive for Cyt staining. The differences between TC and Cyt staining and TC and IC staining were significant (p = 0.001). Cases with positive TC staining showed higher Ki67 expression compared to those with negative staining, 40 vs 30%, respectively (p = 0.05). None of the other clinico-pathological parameters showed any correlation with PDL1 expression. CONCLUSIONS: Antibodies 22C3 and 28-8 can be used interchangeably for PD-L1 determination in tumor cells of TNBC patients. Results for Cyt staining with 22C3 or 28-8 and IC staining with SP142 were identical. In our study PD-L1 expression correlates with Ki67 expression but not with OS or DFS.