PET imaging of zirconium-89 labelled cetuximab: A phase I trial in patients with head and neck and lung cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: PET imaging of cetuximab uptake may help selecting cancer patients with the highest chance of benefit. The aim of this phase I trial was to determine the safety of the tracer 89Zr-cetuximab and to assess tumour uptake. METHODS: Two dose schedules were used; two consecutive doses of 60MBq 89Zr-cetuximab or a single dose of 120MBq, both preceded by 400mg/m2 of unlabelled cetuximab. Toxicity (CTCAE 3.0) was scored twice weekly. PET-CT scans were acquired on days 4, 5 and 6 (step 1) or 5, 6, 7 (step 2). Because tumour uptake could not be assessed satisfactorily, a third step was added including EGFR overexpressing tumours. RESULTS: Nine patients were included (6 NSCLC; 3 HNC). No additional toxicity was associated with administration of 89Zr-cetuximab compared to standard cetuximab. A tumour to blood ratio (TBR)>1 was observed in all but one patient, with a maximum of 4.56. TBR was not different between dose schedules. There was a trend for higher TBR at intervals>5days after injection. CONCLUSIONS: Both presented 89Zr-cetuximab administration schedules are safe. The recommended dose for future trials is 60MBq, with a minimum time interval for scanning of 6days.

Transbronchial Lung Cryobiopsy for Interstitial Lung Disease Diagnosis: A Perspective From Members of the Pulmonary Pathology Society.

Transbronchial lung cryobiopsy involves using a cryoprobe rather than forceps to obtain a bronchoscopic biopsy. Recent studies have shown that transbronchial cryobiopsy provides a larger specimen than conventional transbronchial forceps biopsy, and that the interobserver agreement in the interpretation of cryobiopsy specimens is comparable to that of a surgical lung biopsy. This is encouraging, and transbronchial lung cryobiopsy clearly has a role in the workup and diagnosis of interstitial lung diseases. However, very few patients who have been studied underwent both transbronchial lung cryobiopsy and surgical lung biopsy, and the available data suggest that the diagnostic accuracy of cryobiopsy may not be similar to that of surgical lung biopsy. Further study is needed before transbronchial lung biopsy can be recommended as a replacement for surgical lung biopsy.

Liquid Biopsy in Lung Cancer: A Perspective From Members of the Pulmonary Pathology Society.

Liquid biopsy has received extensive media coverage and has been called the holy grail of cancer detection. Attempts at circulating tumor cell and genetic material capture have been progressing for several years, and recent financially and technically feasible improvements of cell capture devices, plasma isolation techniques, and highly sensitive polymerase chain reaction- and sequencing-based methods have advanced the possibility of liquid biopsy of solid tumors. Although practical use of circulating RNA-based testing has been hindered by the need to fractionate blood to enrich for RNAs, the detection of circulating tumor cells has profited from advances in cell capture technology. In fact, the US Food and Drug Administration has approved one circulating tumor cell selection platform, the CellSearch System. Although the use of liquid biopsy in a patient population with a genomically defined solid tumor may potentially be clinically useful, it currently does not supersede conventional pretreatment tissue diagnosis of lung cancer. Liquid biopsy has not been validated for lung cancer diagnosis, and its lower sensitivity could lead to significant diagnostic delay if liquid biopsy were to be used in lieu of tissue biopsy. Ultimately, notwithstanding the enthusiasm encompassing liquid biopsy, its clinical utility remains unproven.

Biomarker Testing in Lung Carcinoma Cytology Specimens: A Perspective From Members of the Pulmonary Pathology Society.

The advent of targeted therapy in lung cancer has heralded a paradigm shift in the practice of cytopathology with the need for accurately subtyping lung carcinoma, as well as providing adequate material for molecular studies, to help guide clinical and therapeutic decisions. The variety and versatility of cytologic-specimen preparations offer significant advantages to molecular testing; however, they frequently remain underused. Therefore, evaluating the utility and adequacy of cytologic specimens is critical, not only from a lung cancer diagnosis standpoint but also for the myriad ancillary studies that are necessary to provide appropriate clinical management. A large fraction of lung cancers are diagnosed by aspiration or exfoliative cytology specimens, and thus, optimizing strategies to triage and best use the tissue for diagnosis and biomarker studies forms a critical component of lung cancer management. This review focuses on the opportunities and challenges of using cytologic specimens for molecular diagnosis of lung cancer and the role of cytopathology in the molecular era.

Programmed Death Ligand-1 Immunohistochemistry--A New Challenge for Pathologists: A Perspective From Members of the Pulmonary Pathology Society.

The binding of programmed death ligand-1 and ligand-2 (PD-L1 and PD-L2) to PD-1 blocks T-cell-mediated immune response to tumor. Antibodies that target programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) will block the ligand-receptor interface, thereby allowing T cells to attack the tumor and increase antitumor immune response. In clinical trials, PD-1 inhibitors have been associated with an approximately 20% overall response rate in unselected patients with non-small cell lung cancer, with sustained tumor response in a subset of patients treated by these immune checkpoint inhibitors. Facing a proliferation of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry clones, staining platforms, and scoring criteria, the pathologist must decide on the feasibility of introducing a newly approved companion diagnostic assay that may require purchase not only of a specific antibody kit but of a particular staining platform. Given the likely reality that clinical practice may, in the near future, demand access to 4 different PD-L1 antibodies coupled with different immunohistochemistry platforms, laboratories will be challenged with deciding among this variety of testing methods, each with its own potential benefits. Another immediate challenge to PD-L1 testing in lung cancer patients is that of access to adequate tumor tissue, given that non-small cell lung cancer samples are often extremely limited in size. With PD-L1 testing it has become clear that the historically used US regulatory approach of one assay-one drug will not be sustainable. One evolving concept is that of complementary diagnostics, a novel regulatory pathway initiated by the US Food and Drug Administration, which is distinct from companion diagnostics in that it may present additional flexibility. Although pathologists need to face the practical reality that oncologists will be asking regularly for the PD-L1 immunohistochemistry status of their patients' tumors, we should also keep in mind that there may be room for improvement of biomarkers for immunotherapy response. The field is rich with opportunities for investigation into biomarkers of immunotherapy response, particularly in the form of collaborative, multidisciplinary studies that incorporate oncologists, pathologists, and basic scientists. Pathologists must take the lead in the rational incorporation of these biomarkers into clinical practice.