Update on quality assurance in neuropathology: Summary of the round robin trials on TERT promoter mutation, H3-3A mutation, 1p/19q codeletion, and KIAA1549::BRAF fusion testing in Germany in 2020 and 2021.

We previously reported on the first neuropathological round robin trials operated together with Quality in Pathology (QuIP) GmbH in 2018 and 2019 in Germany, i.e., the trials on IDH mutational testing and MGMT promoter methylation analysis [1]. For 2020 and 2021, the spectrum of round robin trials has been expanded to cover the most commonly used assays in neuropathological institutions. In addition to IDH mutation and MGMT promoter methylation testing, there is a long tradition for 1p/19q codeletion testing relevant in the context of the diagnosis of oligodendroglioma. With the 5th edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of the central nervous system tumors, additional molecular markers came into focus: TERT promoter mutation is often assessed as a molecular diagnostic criterion for IDH-wildtype glioblastoma. Moreover, several molecular diagnostic markers have been introduced for pediatric brain tumors. Here, trials on KIAA1549::BRAF fusions (common in pilocytic astrocytomas) and H3-3A mutations (in diffuse midline gliomas, H3-K27-altered and diffuse hemispheric gliomas, H3-G34-mutant) were most desired by the neuropathological community. In this update, we report on these novel round robin trials. In summary, success rates in all four trials ranged from 75 to 96%, arguing for an overall high quality level in the field of molecular neuropathological diagnostics.

Quality assurance in neuropathology: Experiences from the round robin trials on IDH mutation and MGMT promoter methylation testing launched by the Quality Assurance Initiative Pathology (QuIP) in 2018 and 2019.

We here report on the first neuropathological round robin trials initiated by the Quality Assurance Initiative Pathology (QuIP) in Germany in the years 2018 and 2019. Testing services as external laboratory controls were offered for IDH1-R132H immunohistochemistry in 2018 followed by a molecular trial for IDH1 and IDH2 mutations in 2019 including the rare mutational variants. Also in 2019, a trial on MGMT promoter methylation testing was offered. On a national scale, trial offers were well received with around 40 participating institutions. The international announcement of the molecular IDH1/IDH2 mutational trial achieved only moderate European outspread. Success rates in all three trials were excellent (IDH1-R132H immunohistochemistry 2018: 94%, 18 out of 20 possible points required; IDH1/IDH2 mutational status 2019: 100%, 19 out of 20 possible points required; MGMT promoter methylation 2019: 94%, 19 out of 20 possible points required) indicating that quality standards are high in the broad majority of the institutions. Trial participation also involved filling in a questionnaire asking for background information on local testing procedures. We here present a first assessment of the information collected providing unique insights in the landscape of molecular testing in neuropathology. Derived from this information we identify future challenges and provide an outlook on the development of quality assurance in the field of neuropathology.

Multinational proficiency tests for EGFR exon 20 insertions reveal that the assay design matters.

Insertion mutations in exon 20 of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR exon20ins) are rare, heterogeneous alterations observed in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). With a few exceptions, they are associated with primary resistance to established EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). As patients carrying EGFR exon20ins may be eligible for treatment with novel therapeutics-the bispecific antibody amivantamab, the TKI mobocertinib, or potential future innovations-they need to be identified reliably in clinical practice for which quality-based routine genetic testing is crucial. Spearheaded by the German Quality Assurance Initiative Pathology two international proficiency tests were run, assessing the performance of 104 participating institutes detecting EGFR exon20ins in tissue and/or plasma samples. EGFR exon20ins were most reliably identified using next-generation sequencing (NGS). Interestingly, success rates of institutes using commercially available mutation-/allele-specific quantitative (q)PCR were below 30% for tissue samples and 0% for plasma samples. Most of these mutation-/allele-specific (q)PCR assays are not designed to detect the whole spectrum of EGFR exon20ins mutations leading to false negative results. These data suggest that NGS is a suitable method to detect EGFR exon20ins in various types of patient samples and is superior to the detection spectrum of commercially available assays.