Assessment of RANK/RANK-L prevalence and clinical significance in NSCLC European Thoracic Oncology Platform Lungscape cohort and SPLENDOUR randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the clinical significance of RANK/L expression, in both a retrospective cohort of surgically resected stage I-III NSCLC (Lungscape) and a randomized clinical trial-cohort (SPLENDOUR) of advanced NSCLC treated with chemotherapy alone or in combination with denosumab. METHODS: RANK-L expression was assessed on tissue microarrays (TMAs) in Lungscape and whole sections in SPLENDOUR, using immunohistochemistry, with H-scores values > 0 indicating positivity. Prevalence of RANK positivity and its association with clinicopathological characteristics, and patient outcome was explored in a subset of the ETOP Lungscape cohort and in SPLENDOUR. Also investigated were the prevalence of RANK overexpression (proportion of positive cancer cells ≥ 50%) in the Lungscape cohort, and RANK-L in the SPLENDOUR trial. RESULTS: In the Lungscape cohort, RANK expression was assessed at a median follow-up of 46 months (N = 488 patients; 4 centers); 35% were female, 44/49/6% adenocarcinomas (AC)/squamous cell carcinomas (SCC)/other, 48/27/25% with stage I/II/III. Median RFS/TTR/OS were 58/Not reached/74 months. Prevalence of RANK expression was 31% (95%CI:27%-35%); significantly higher in AC: 50% (95%CI:43%-57%) vs SCC: 12% (95%CI:8%-16%) (p < 0.001); more frequent in females (42% vs 25%, p < 0.001) and tumors ≤ 4 cm (35.3% vs 23.3%, p = 0.0065). No association with outcome was found. In the SPLENDOUR trial (463 patients), the prevalence of membranous and cytoplasmic RANK positivity was 34% (95%CI:30%-38%) and 9% (95%CI:7%-12%), respectively, while prevalence for RANK-L was 5% (95%CI:3%-7%) and 36% (95%CI:31%-40%), respectively. Cytoplasmic RANK-L positivity was more common among females (47% vs 31%, p = 0.001) and in non-SCC histology (45% vs 10%, p < 0.0001). At the pre-specified 1% significance level, no prognostic or predictive effect was found. CONCLUSIONS: Both cohorts indicate that RANK expression is more common in adenocarcinoma/non-squamous NSCLC and in female patients. No prognostic effect is found, and in the clinical trial involving addition of denosumab to chemotherapy no predictive effect is detected.

Informative value of histological assessment of tissue acquired during aquablation of the prostate.

PURPOSE: To determine the histological validity of the tissue acquired during aquablation of the prostate. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prostatic tissue of 12 patients that consecutively underwent aquablation for benign prostatic enlargement was systematically examined. Histological examination was performed by two experienced uropathologists using a digital slide scanner and slide viewer software (Pannoramic 250 and Case Viewer 2.3, 3D Histech, Hungary). The surface areas of the assessable glands were examined and set in relation to the total surface area of the material available for histology and to the patient's total prostate volume. Examinations were performed analogously in ten consecutive patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to facilitate interpretation of the results. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A median of 4.06% (range 1.43-7.5%) of the preoperative total prostate volume (median 64.5 ml (range 40-80 ml)) was obtained for histological examination by aquablation. Due to severe mechanical destruction and fragmentation, only a proportion of 0.43% (0.06-1.79%) of this tissue represented histologically assessable glands. Therefore, roughly 0.017% of the total prostatic volume was available for a reliable histological examination. In comparison, 32.5% (6.67-37.5%) of the total prostate volume was removed by TURP and 22.86% (7.45-40.57%) of this tissue represented informative prostatic glands, corresponding to 7.43% of the total prostate volume. CONCLUSION: Histological significance of the tissue obtained by aquablation of the prostate is very limited. Costs and effort of the histological examination must, therefore, be weighed critically against the limited informative value.

Robust assessment of tumor mutational burden in cytological specimens from lung cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: Tumor mutational burden (TMB) has emerged as a promising predictive biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. While the feasibility of TMB analysis on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples has been thoroughly evaluated, only limited analyses have been performed on cytological samples, and no dedicated study has investigated concordance of TMB between different sample types. Here, we assessed TMB on matched histological and cytological samples from lung cancer patients and evaluated the accuracy of TMB estimation in these sample types. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed mutations and resulting TMB in FFPE samples and matched ethanol-fixed cytological smears (n = 12 matched pairs) by using a targeted next-generation sequencing assay (Oncomine™ Tumor Mutational Load). Two different variant allele frequency (VAF) thresholds were used to estimate TMB (VAF = 5% or 10%). RESULTS: At 5% VAF threshold, 73% (107/147) of mutations were concordantly detected in matched histological and cytological samples. Discordant variants were mainly unique to FFPE samples (34/40 discordant variants) and mostly C:G > T:A transitions with low allelic frequency, likely indicating formalin fixation artifacts. Increasing the VAF threshold to 10% clearly increased the number of concordantly detected mutations in matched histological and cytological samples to 96% (100/106 mutations), and drastically reduced the number of FFPE-only mutations (from 34 to 4 mutations). In contrast, cytological samples showed consistent mutation count and TMB values at both VAF thresholds. Using FFPE samples, 2 out of 12 patients were classified as TMB-high at VAF cutoff of 5% but TMB-low at 10%, whereas cytological specimens allowed consistent patient classification independently from VAF cutoff. CONCLUSION: Our results show that cytological smears provide more consistent TMB values due to high DNA quality and lack of formalin-fixation induced artifacts. Therefore, cytological samples should be the preferred sample type for robust TMB estimation.

IASLC Multidisciplinary Recommendations for Pathologic Assessment of Lung Cancer Resection Specimens After Neoadjuvant Therapy.

Currently, there is no established guidance on how to process and evaluate resected lung cancer specimens after neoadjuvant therapy in the setting of clinical trials and clinical practice. There is also a lack of precise definitions on the degree of pathologic response, including major pathologic response or complete pathologic response. For other cancers such as osteosarcoma and colorectal, breast, and esophageal carcinomas, there have been multiple studies investigating pathologic assessment of the effects of neoadjuvant therapy, including some detailed recommendations on how to handle these specimens. A comprehensive mapping approach to gross and histologic processing of osteosarcomas after induction therapy has been used for over 40 years. The purpose of this article is to outline detailed recommendations on how to process lung cancer resection specimens and to define pathologic response, including major pathologic response or complete pathologic response after neoadjuvant therapy. A standardized approach is recommended to assess the percentages of (1) viable tumor, (2) necrosis, and (3) stroma (including inflammation and fibrosis) with a total adding up to 100%. This is recommended for all systemic therapies, including chemotherapy, chemoradiation, molecular-targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or any future novel therapies yet to be discovered, whether administered alone or in combination. Specific issues may differ for certain therapies such as immunotherapy, but the grossing process should be similar, and the histologic evaluation should contain these basic elements. Standard pathologic response assessment should allow for comparisons between different therapies and correlations with disease-free survival and overall survival in ongoing and future trials. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer has an effort to collect such data from existing and future clinical trials. These recommendations are intended as guidance for clinical trials, although it is hoped they can be viewed as suggestion for good clinical practice outside of clinical trials, to improve consistency of pathologic assessment of treatment response.

The relevance of external quality assessment for molecular testing for ALK positive non-small cell lung cancer: results from two pilot rounds show room for optimization.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Molecular profiling should be performed on all advanced non-small cell lung cancer with non-squamous histology to allow treatment selection. Currently, this should include EGFR mutation testing and testing for ALK rearrangements. ROS1 is another emerging target. ALK rearrangement status is a critical biomarker to predict response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as crizotinib. To promote high quality testing in non-small cell lung cancer, the European Society of Pathology has introduced an external quality assessment scheme. This article summarizes the results of the first two pilot rounds organized in 2012-2013. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Tissue microarray slides consisting of cell-lines and resection specimens were distributed with the request for routine ALK testing using IHC or FISH. Participation in ALK FISH testing included the interpretation of four digital FISH images. RESULTS: Data from 173 different laboratories was obtained. Results demonstrate decreased error rates in the second round for both ALK FISH and ALK IHC, although the error rates were still high and the need for external quality assessment in laboratories performing ALK testing is evident. Error rates obtained by FISH were lower than by IHC. The lowest error rates were observed for the interpretation of digital FISH images. CONCLUSION: There was a large variety in FISH enumeration practices. Based on the results from this study, recommendations for the methodology, analysis, interpretation and result reporting were issued. External quality assessment is a crucial element to improve the quality of molecular testing.

Testing for anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearrangement to target crizotinib therapy: oncology, pathology and health economic perspectives.

Crizotinib is a first-in-class oral anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor targeting ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer. The therapy was approved by the US FDA in August 2011 and received conditional marketing approval by the European Commission in October 2012 for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. A break-apart FISH-based assay was jointly approved with crizotinib by the FDA. This assay and an immunohistochemistry assay that uses a D5F3 rabbit monoclonal primary antibody were also approved for marketing in Europe in October 2012. While ALK rearrangement has relatively low prevalence, a clinical benefit is exhibited in more than 85% of patients with median progression-free survival of 8-10 months. In this article, the authors summarize the therapy and alternative test strategies for identifying patients who are likely to respond to therapy, including key issues for effective and efficient testing. The key economic considerations regarding the joint companion diagnostic and therapy are also presented. Given the observed clinical benefit and relatively high cost of crizotinib therapy, companion diagnostics should be evaluated relative to response to therapy versus correlation alone whenever possible, and both high inter-rater reliability and external quality assessment programs are warranted.

Assessment of mean EGFR gene copy number is a highly reproducible method for evaluating FISH in histological and cytological cancer specimens.

The aims of this study were first, to systematically assess the inter-observer reproducibility of mean Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) gene copy number (MCN) in histological and cytological specimens from lung and non-lung cancers, second to compare the performance of this quantitative approach to the current Colorado criteria for the assessment of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) positivity and third to develop a model to convert cytology into histology MCN. EGFR FISH analysis was performed on 170 histological and 153 cytological specimens. The MCN and Colorado criteria were assessed by two independent observers and agreement evaluated using Bland-Altman plots and kappa values. Conversion of cytology into histology MCN was tested on two randomized subgroups of specimens. Applying the Colorado criteria, agreement between observers was moderate with histology (k=0.5) and excellent with cytology (k=0.94). Positivity in histology versus cytology led to fair agreement (k=0.33). MCN was significantly greater in cytology compared to histology (p<0.001) with excellent inter-observer agreement in both sample types (r=0.99 and 0.89, respectively). The average difference in MCN between observers was -0.003 (95%CI: -0.05 to 0.05) and 0.008 (95%CI: -0.09 to 0.11) for cytology and histology, respectively. A reliable conversion model with an R(2)-value of 0.91 in the validation subgroup (p<0.001) was obtained. The MCN is a reproducible scoring method for evaluating EGFR FISH in samples from lung and non-lung cancers. This quantitative scoring system may constitute an alternative to current methods of gene copy number assessment and will further help to optimize patient selection for targeted therapies.