Diagnostic and Predictive Immunocytochemistry in Lung Cancer.

Background Immunocytochemistry (ICC) is suitable for use on a range of cytology preparations, such as cell blocks, air-dried slides, ethanol-fixed slides, direct smears, cytospins, and liquid-based cytology (LBC) samples. However, it must be standardized against the gold standard of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues with adequate number of positive and negative controls. The role of ICC in lung cancer is crucial, as most lung cancer specimens are cytology samples. Accurate diagnosis and testing of certain biomarkers rely heavily on both diagnostic and predictive ICC. Summary Key ICC markers important in lung cancer include, but are not limited to, diagnostic ICCs such as TTF-1, p40, Napsin A, and p63, as well as predictive ICCs like ALK, ROS-1, PD-L1, and NTRK. Key Messages With proper validation, immunocytochemistry for lung cancer can be effectively performed on direct smears, cytospins, and other specimens, even when resources for preparing cell blocks are unavailable. This is particularly true for diagnostic antibodies, but it is important to exercise caution with predictive immunocytochemistry. Nonetheless, a low threshold for molecular testing should be maintained. PD-L1 ICC can be challenging and should ideally be performed on formalin-fixed cell blocks or biopsies when available.

Application of liquid biopsy in lung cancer management.

ABSTRACT: Current advances in the understanding of the lung cancer landscape have drastically changed the approach to treating a patient with lung carcinoma. The field has progressed from analyzing single gene to using advanced techniques like next-generation sequencing and microarray technology. While a tumor tissue sample is considered the gold standard, it has several limitations. The limitations of invasive procedures, long processing periods, inaccessibility, and sample inadequacy are being addressed by sampling biofluids, termed 'liquid biopsy,' which offers a less invasive and more accessible way to obtain tumor-related information. Liquid biopsy has transformed the care of lung cancer patients by directly targeting somatic alterations from tumors. This article provides insights into the biology, technical aspects, limitations, and practical applications of 'liquid biopsy,' focusing on cell-free DNA and circulating tumor DNA in the context of lung cancer.

Assessment of MUC5AC and MUC2 Immunoexpression in Glandular Odontogenic Cysts, Dentigerous Cysts, and Mucoepidermoid Carcinomas.

Glandular odontogenic cysts (GOCs) and dentigerous cysts may show mucous metaplasia. Central mucoepidermoid carcinoma is very rare and mostly associated with dental cysts. It is hypothesized that odontogenic cysts showing mucus differentiation in their lining, have a propensity to transform into MEC. The present study is the first attempt to explore the relationship between odontogenic cysts [GOCs and dentigerous cysts with mucus metaplasia (DCMM)] and MEC by evaluating immunoexpression of MUC5AC and MUC2. Immunoexpression of MUC5AC and MUC2 was evaluated semiquantitatively in GOCs (20 cases), DCMMs (20 cases), and MECs (20 cases). The percentage of positive cells, intensity, and localization of immunoexpression were assessed for each marker in all cases. Of GOCs, DCMMs, and MECs cases, 85%, 70%, and 80%, respectively, were immunopositive for MUC5AC. Strong cytoplasmic immunoreactivity for MUC5AC was noted, particularly in mucous cells present diffusely within MECs. However, the immunoreactivity was limited to the epithelial lining of GOCs and DCMMs. Most of the MECs (60%) showed more than 25% positivity for MUC5AC, followed by GOCs, and the least in DMMCs. Mild cytoplasmic and nuclear positivity of MUC2 was noted only in epithelial lining cells of 70% GOCs and 45% DCMMs. Whereas, 55% of MECs displayed moderate to strong cytoplasmic and membranous immunopositivity for MUC2 exclusively within mucous cells. As MECs showed strong MUC5AC immunoreactivity in mucous cells, immunoexpression of MUC5AC in odontogenic cysts with mucus cells can possibly explain the pathogenesis of MEC from cysts. However, the variable expression of MUC2 did not give any strong evidence regarding its role as a marker.

Evaluation of high-risk human papillomavirus in sinonasal papillomas and squamous cell carcinomas.

The sinonasal tract is considered a second hotspot for human papillomavirus (HPV)-related tumors in the head and neck, with HPV being identified in up to 62% of squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) and 38% of papillomas. There is limited data from geographical regions with low prevalence of high-risk (HR)-HPV on the association of HR-HPV in sinonasal neoplasms and on utility of p16 as a surrogate marker. p16 immunohistochemistry, HR-HPV mRNA ISH and quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) were performed on a retrospective cohort of sinonasal papillomas and SCCs. KRAS mutation analysis was done in oncocytic papillomas. p16 positivity was present in 22/142 cases (15.5%) including eight inverted papillomas, one oncocytic papilloma (OP), and 13 SCC. Among these, mRNA ISH showed HR-HPV in the OP and two SCC, while another SCC was found to harbour HPV18 by qPCR. Two HPV-associated SCCs had foci of OP. mRNA ISH was negative in all p16 negative cases. p16 immunohistochemistry showed 68% concordance with mRNA ISH, and had sensitivity and negative predictive value of 100%; specificity was 67%, and positive predictive value was 14.3%. Association with HR-HPV in sinonasal papillomas and SCC is rare, and may be seen in cases demonstrating oncocytic morphology. p16 immunohistochemistry has low specificity and positive predictive value in low-prevalence populations; thus, reflex direct HR-HPV testing should be performed in p16 immunopositive cases. This two-step approach is viable in resource-limited settings, as the proportion of p16 positive cases is small.

EGFR mutation testing on plasma and urine samples: A pilot study evaluating the value of liquid biopsy in lung cancer diagnosis and management.

BACKGROUND: Cell free DNA (cfDNA) shed by cancer cells into blood and body fluids is a potential substrate for molecular testing. While plasma is approved for EGFR mutation testing in certain clinical settings, mutation testing on urine is not well explored in lung cancer. In this study, we assess the feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of EGFR mutation analysis on plasma and urine samples. METHODS: Matched plasma and urine were collected prospectively from TKI-naïve lung adenocarcinoma (ADCA) patients (Group A) with available tumor tissue. Only plasma was collected from TKI-treated, known EGFR mutant ADCA patients developing TKI resistance (Group B). qPCR (tumor tissue) or digital droplet-PCR (urine/plasma) was performed for exon 19 deletions, exon 21 L858R and exon 20 T790M. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients (60 Group A, 21 Group B) were included. In Group A, EGFR mutations were detected in tissue in 34/60 (57%) patients. Mutations were detected in matched plasma in 24 (24/34, 70.5% sensitivity), and in matched urine in 15 (15/25, 60% sensitivity) of the 34 EGFR mutant cases, with no false positives (100% positive predictive value). Plasma and urine mutation results showed moderate agreement (70%) with a combined sensitivity of 88% (22/25). In Group B, new T790M mutations were detected in plasma in 61% (13/21) patients. CONCLUSION: Liquid biopsies show moderate sensitivity (plasma > urine) with 100% positive predictive rates for EGFR mutations. Testing of more than one type of liquid biopsy sample increases sensitivity. In TKI-resistant settings, liquid biopsies can obviate need for invasive biopsies in >60% patients.