A pan-cancer analysis of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry and gene amplification, tumor mutation burden and microsatellite instability in 48,782 cases.

PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) currently has the most Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals as a companion diagnostic (CDx) for immunotherapies in specific tumor types; however, multiple other immunotherapy biomarkers exist. We performed this study to examine and report the prevalence of PD-L1 expression in a wide variety of tumor types and examine its relationship to microsatellite instability (MSI), tumor mutational burden (TMB), and CD274 (PD-L1) gene amplification. We performed a retrospective analysis of all cases in which both PD-L1 IHC (using the DAKO 22C3 IHC assay with either tumor proportion score (TPS) or combined positive score (CPS); or the VENTANA SP142 assay with infiltrating immune cell score (IC)) and comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) were tested at Foundation Medicine between January 2016 and November 2019. Of note, PD-L1 positivity is defined per the CDx indication and tumor proportion score (TPS ≥ 1) for indications without a CDx claim; and TMB positivity is defined as ≥10 mutations/Mb. A total of 48,782 cases were tested for PD-L1 IHC and CGP. Immune cell expression of PD-L1 was more frequently identified than tumor cell expression of PD-L1. We saw a high correlation between PD-L1 expression and CD274 gene amplification (p < 0.0001), MSI and TMB (p < 0.0001), and PD-L1 and TMB (p < 0.0001). In addition, the combination of PD-L1 and TMB identified four unique disease subsets PD-L1-/TMB-, PD-L1+/TMB-, PD-L1-/TMB+, and PD-L1+/TMB+ with varying prevalence dependent on tumor type. Lastly, 50.3% (24527/48782) of the overall cohort was positive for at least one of the CDx or exploratory biomarkers described above. This is the largest pan-cancer analysis of relevant biomarkers associated with response to checkpoint inhibitors to date, including more than 48,000 cases. Additional clinical trials with treatment outcome data in individual tumor types are needed to determine whether the double positive PD-L1+/TMB+ disease subset would respond best to immunotherapy.

Correlating ROS1 Protein Expression With ROS1 Fusions, Amplifications, and Mutations.

INTRODUCTION: In this study, we sought to further characterize ROS1 protein expression in solid tumors with the complete spectrum of ROS1 genomic alterations. METHODS: ROS1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed using the ROS1 (SP384) class I assay per manufacturer's instructions on a variety of solid tumors (n = 32) with known ROS1 genomic alterations. Genomic alterations included fusions (n = 17), gene amplifications (n = 10), and short-variant mutations (n = 11). RESULTS: Of the 32 cases with ROS1 IHC results, 100% (11 of 11) with canonical ROS1 fusions were positive for ROS1 IHC. Among noncanonical ROS1 fusions, only two (of five) cases with SQSTM1-ROS1 and RDX-ROS1 fusions were positive for ROS1 IHC whereas PTPRK-ROS1 (two) and TTC28-ROS1 fusions were negative for ROS1 IHC. One sample with a canonical ROS1 fusion and co-occurring ROS1 resistance mutation (6094G>A, p.G2032R) was positive for ROS1 IHC. A total of 10% (one of 10) of ROS1 amplified tumors were positive for ROS1 IHC. None of the cases (zero of five) with ROS1 short-variant mutations were positive for ROS1 protein expression. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that if ROS1 IHC was used as a screening tool for ROS1 fusion, a subset of fusion-negative tumors will reveal positive IHC staining highlighting the value of reflexing to genomic profiling to confirm the presence of a targetable fusion-driver before the initiation of therapy. In addition, the ability of comprehensive genomic profiling to detect ROS1 resistance mutations will be important for clinical decision making.

Landscape of Biomarkers in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Using Comprehensive Genomic Profiling and PD-L1 Immunohistochemistry.

Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) are important biomarker tools used for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) given the expanding number of standard-of-care therapies that require companion diagnostic testing. We examined 9450 NSCLC real-world patient samples that underwent both CGP and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) IHC to understand the biomarker landscape in this patient cohort. By assessing National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)-recommended biomarkers including genomic alterations, tumor mutational burden (≥10 mutations/Mb cut-off), and PD-L1 expression (Tumor Proportion Score (TPS) ≥ 50% cut-off), we show that CGP + PD-L1 IHC yielded potentially actionable results for 70.5% of the 9,450 patients with NSCLC. Among the remaining 29.5% (2,789/9,450) of patients, 86.7% (2,419/2,789) were potentially eligible for another biomarker-associated therapy and/or clinical trial based on their genomic profile. In addition, in the PD-L1TPS≥50% disease subset, BRAF mutations, MET mutations, MET amplifications, and KRAS mutations were significantly enriched; and in the PD-L1TPS<50%, EGFR mutations, ERBB2 mutations, STK11 mutations, and KEAP1 mutations were enriched. These findings highlight the improved clinical utility of combining CGP with IHC to expand the biomarker-guided therapeutic options available for patients with NSCLC, relative to single biomarker testing alone.