Reliability and Responsiveness of Histologic Indices for the Assessment of Crohn's Disease Activity.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The operating properties of histologic indices for evaluating Crohn's disease (CD) activity are poorly characterized. We assessed the reliability and responsiveness of existing histologic indices/items used in CD and ulcerative colitis (UC), in addition to 3 novel items, and developed exploratory ileal, colonic, and colonic-ileal CD instruments. METHODS: Blinded central readers independently reviewed paired baseline and week 12 image sets from the EXTEND trial. Disease activity was scored using 4 indices (the Global Histologic Activity Score, Geboes Score, Nancy Histological Index, and Robarts Histopathology Index) and 3 items identified by an expert panel (mucin depletion, basal plasmacytosis, and ileal pyloric gland metaplasia). Reliability and responsiveness were quantified using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), respectively. Exploratory indices were developed using backward stepwise linear regression analysis. Candidate independent variables were items with an inter-rater ICC ≥0.40 and AUC ≥0.56. The dependent variable was histologic disease activity measured by a 100-mm visual analogue scale. RESULTS: Paired image sets were available from 55 patients. Substantial to almost perfect inter-rater reliability (ICC, 0.63-0.87) and some responsiveness (AUC, 0.57-0.94) were observed for all existing indices regardless of whether individual colonic and ileal segments, combined colonic segments, or combined colonic and ileal segments were assessed and the calculation method used. Five items were tested as candidate items, and exploratory colonic, ileal, and colonic-ileal indices were developed. CONCLUSIONS: CD and UC indices were similarly reliable and responsive in measuring histologic CD activity. Exploratory index development did not offer benefit over current histologic instruments.

Recommendations for standardizing biopsy acquisition and histological assessment of immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated colitis.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated colitis (ICIC) affects approximately 15% of cancer patients treated with immunotherapy. Although histological evaluation is potentially valuable for both the diagnosis of ICIC and evaluation of disease activity, use in clinical practice is heterogeneous. We aimed to develop expert recommendations to standardize histological assessment of disease activity in patients with ICIC. Using the modified Research and Development/University of California Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) appropriateness methodology, an international panel of 11 pathologists rated the appropriateness of 99 statements on a 9-point Likert scale during two rounds of anonymous voting. Results were discussed between rounds using moderated videoconferences. There are currently no disease-specific instruments for assessing histological features of ICIC. The panel considered that colonoscopy with at least three biopsies per segment from a total of at least five segments, including both endoscopically normal and inflamed areas, was appropriate for tissue acquisition. They agreed that biopsies should be oriented such that the long axis of the colonic crypts is visualized and should be stained with hematoxylin and eosin. Histological items that the panel voted were appropriate to evaluate in ICIC included the degree of structural/architectural change, chronic inflammatory infiltrate, lamina propria and intraepithelial neutrophils, crypt abscesses and destruction, erosions/ulcerations, apoptosis, surface intraepithelial lymphocytosis, and subepithelial collagen thickness. The appropriateness of routine immunohistochemistry was uncertain. These expert recommendations will help standardize assessment of histological activity in patients with ICIC. The panel also identified the development and validation of an ICIC-specific histological index as a research priority.

Clinical and cost outcomes following genomics-informed treatment for advanced cancers.

BACKGROUND: Single-arm trials are common in precision oncology. Owing to the lack of randomized counterfactual, resultant data are not amenable to comparative outcomes analyses. Difference-in-difference (DID) methods present an opportunity to generate causal estimates of time-varying treatment outcomes. Using DID, our study estimates within-cohort effects of genomics-informed treatment versus standard care on clinical and cost outcomes. METHODS: We focus on adults with advanced cancers enrolled in the single-arm BC Cancer Personalized OncoGenomics program between 2012 and 2017. All individuals had a minimum of 1-year follow up. Logistic regression explored baseline differences across patients who received a genomics-informed treatment versus a standard care treatment after genomic sequencing. DID estimated the incremental effects of genomics-informed treatment on time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), time to next treatment (TTNT), and costs. TTD and TTNT correlate with improved response and survival. RESULTS: Our study cohort included 346 patients, of whom 140 (40%) received genomics-informed treatment after sequencing and 206 (60%) received standard care treatment. No significant differences in baseline characteristics were detected across treatment groups. DID estimated that the incremental effect of genomics-informed versus standard care treatment was 102 days (95% CI: 35, 167) on TTD, 91 days (95% CI: -9, 175) on TTNT, and CAD$91,098 (95% CI: $46,848, $176,598) on costs. Effects were most pronounced in gastrointestinal cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS: Genomics-informed treatment had a statistically significant effect on TTD compared to standard care treatment, but at increased treatment costs. Within-cohort evidence generated through this single-arm study informs the early-stage comparative effectiveness of precision oncology.

An expert consensus to standardise the assessment of histological disease activity in Crohn's disease clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Targeting histological remission or response in Crohn's disease (CD) is not recommended in clinical practice guidelines or as an outcome in clinical trials due to uncertainties regarding index validity and prognostic relevance. AIMS: To conduct a modified RAND/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness process with the goal of producing a framework to standardise histological assessment of CD activity in clinical trials. METHODS: A total of 115 statements generated from literature review and expert opinion were rated on a scale of 1-9 by a panel of 11 histopathologists and 6 gastroenterologists. Statements were classified as inappropriate, uncertain or appropriate based upon the median panel rating and degree of disagreement. RESULTS: The panellists considered it important to measure histological activity in clinical trials to determine efficacy and that absence of neutrophilic inflammation is an appropriate histological target. They were uncertain whether the Global Histological Activity Score was an appropriate instrument for measuring histological activity. The Geboes Score and Robarts Histopathology Index were considered appropriate. Two biopsies from five segments should be biopsied, and the colon and the ileum should be analysed separately for all indices. Endoscopic mucosal appearance should guide biopsy procurement site with biopsies taken from the ulcer edge, or the most macroscopically inflamed area in the absence of ulcers. CONCLUSION: We evaluated the appropriateness of items for assessing histological disease activity in CD clinical trials. These items will be used to develop a novel histological index.

Reproducibility of tumor budding assessment in pancreatic cancer based on a multicenter interobserver study.

Tumor budding has been reported to be an independent prognostic factor in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Its use in daily diagnostics would improve the prognostic stratification of patients. We performed a multicenter interobserver study to test various budding assessment methods for their reproducibility. Two serial sections of 50 resected, treatment-naïve PDACs were stained for Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) and pancytokeratin. Tumor budding was scored by independent observers at five participating centers in Switzerland, Germany, and Canada. Pathologists assessed tumor budding on a digital platform comparing H&E with pancytokeratin staining in 10 high-power fields (10HPF) and one HPF hotspot (1HPF). Additionally, tumor budding was assessed in one H&E hotspot at × 20 magnification, as suggested by the International Tumor Budding Consensus Conference (ITBCC). Correlation coefficients for bud counts between centers ranged from r = 0.58648 to r = 0.78641 for H&E and from r = 0.69288 to r = 0.81764 for pancytokeratin. The highest interobserver agreement across all centers was observed for pancytokeratin 10HPFs (ICC = 0.6). ICC values were 0.49, 0.48, 0.41, and 0.4 for H&E in 1HPF hotspot, H&E in 10HPFs, pancytokeratin in 1HPF, and H&E in one hotspot at ×20, respectively (ITBCC method). This interobserver study reveals a range between moderately poor to moderate agreement levels between pathologists for the different tumor budding assessment methods in PDAC. Acceptable levels of agreement were reached with the pancytokeratin 10HPF method, which can thus be recommended for the assessment of tumor budding in PDAC resection specimens. To improve the levels of interobserver agreement, the implementation of machine learning applications should be considered.

Evaluating the impact of universal Lynch syndrome screening in a publicly funded healthcare system.

PURPOSE: Referrals for Lynch syndrome (LS) assessment have traditionally been based on personal and family medical history. The introduction of universal screening practices has allowed for referrals based on immunohistochemistry tests for mismatch repair (MMR) protein expression. This study aims to characterize the effect of universal screening in a publicly funded healthcare system with comparison to patients referred by traditional criteria, from January 2012 to March 2017. METHODS: Patient files from the time of initiation of universal screening from 2012 to 2017 were reviewed. Patients were sorted into two groups: (a) universally screened and (b) referred by traditional methods. Mutation detection rates, analysis of traditional testing criteria met, and cascade carrier testing were evaluated. RESULTS: The mutation detection rate of the universal screening group was higher than the traditionally referred group (45/228 (19.7%) vs 50/390 (12.5%), P = .05), though each were able to identify unique patients. An analysis of testing criteria met by each patient showed that half of referred patients from the universal screening group could not meet any traditional testing criteria. CONCLUSION: The implementation of universal screening in a publicly funded system will increase efficiency in detecting patients with LS. The resources available for genetic testing and counseling may be more limited in public systems, thus inclusion of secondary screening with BRAF and MLH1 promoter hypermethylation testing is key to further optimizing efficiency.

Burden of hereditary cancer susceptibility in unselected patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma referred for germline screening.

BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines recommend consideration of germline testing for all newly diagnosed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The primary aim of this study was to determine the burden of hereditary cancer susceptibility in PDAC. A secondary aim was to compare genetic testing uptake rates across different modes of genetic counselling. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients diagnosed with PDAC in the province of British Columbia, Canada referred to a population-based hereditary cancer program were eligible for multi-gene panel testing, irrespective of cancer family history. Any healthcare provider or patients themselves could refer. RESULTS: A total of 305 patients with PDAC were referred between July 2016 and January 2019. Two hundred thirty-five patients attended a consultation and 177 completed index germline genetic testing. 25/177 (14.1%) of unrelated patients had a pathogenic variant (PV); 19/25 PV were in known PDAC susceptibility genes with cancer screening or risk-reduction implications. PDAC was significantly associated with PV in ATM (OR, 7.73; 95% CI, 3.10 to 19.33, P = 6.14E-05) when comparing age and gender and ethnicity-matched controls tested on the same platform. The overall uptake rate for index testing was 59.2% and was significantly higher with 1-on-1 consultations and group consultations compared to telehealth consultations (88.9% vs 82.9% vs 61.8%, P < .001). CONCLUSION: In a prospective clinic-based cohort of patients with PDAC referred for testing irrespective of family history, germline PV were detected in 14.1%. PV in ATM accounted for half of all PVs and were significantly associated with PDAC. These findings support recent guidelines and will guide future service planning in this population.

HER2/neu testing in gastric cancer by immunohistochemistry: assessment of interlaboratory variation.

CONTEXT: Immunohistochemical (IHC) testing for HER2/neu is becoming the standard of care for guiding adjuvant treatment of gastric carcinoma with trastuzumab. OBJECTIVE: To assess interlaboratory variation in IHC staining and interpretation across multiple laboratories. DESIGN: A tissue microarray consisting of 45 cores from 28 gastric cancers was distributed to 37 laboratories for HER2/neu assessment. The IHC results were compared against expert scores at an academic institution and correlated with in situ hybridization results from the originating specimen. Interlaboratory agreement was calculated using Cohen κ statistic. RESULTS: The survey demonstrated several variations in IHC methods, including the primary antibodies in use. There was excellent agreement among laboratories in HER2/neu(+) (IHC 3(+)) cases (κ = 0.80 ± 0.01) and very good agreement among laboratories in HER2/neu(-) (IHC 0 or 1(+)) cases (κ = 0.58 ± 0.01). Less agreement was observed among laboratories when scoring equivocal (IHC 2(+)) cases (κ = 0.22 ± 0.01). Sensitivity and specificity of HER2/neu IHC were 99% and 100%, respectively, when measured against expert review and consensus score as a reference standard. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial interlaboratory agreement in the interpretation of HER2/neu IHC despite variability in protocols. Although HER2/neu IHC is a highly sensitive and specific test, primary antibody selection may significantly affect IHC results. Furthermore, gastric tumors require a unique scoring system and expertise in interpretation. Intratumoral heterogeneity has a significant effect on HER2/neu scoring by IHC. Ongoing quality assurance exercises among laboratories will help ensure optimized HER2/neu testing.