Dergiler / Türk Patoloji Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 3

Efficiency of Cytology Samples for PD-L1 Evaluation and Comparison with Tissue Samples

Sayfa
205–210
Yayın Tarihi
2022-11-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

However, large resections should be used for PD-L1 evaluation whenever possible since even 1% positivity may affect the treatmentdecision

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:PD-L1 blockers have become a first-line option for advanced non-small celllung cancer (NSCLC) patients.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:However, large resections should be used for PD-L1 evaluation whenever possible since even 1% positivity may affect the treatmentdecision
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:73 samples
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Objective: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death. PD-L1 blockers have become a first-line option for advanced non-small celllung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Guidelines require the assessment of PD-L1 expression by immunohistochemistry. Although tissue samples arewidely used, cytologic samples could be an alternative. In this study, we compared cytologic samples with tissue samples for PD-L1 evaluationin NSCLC cases.Material and Method: Koç University Hospital, Department of Pathology Laboratory Information System was scanned for all PD-L1 testsperformed on NSCLC cases, either on tissue samples or cell blocks. The type of the biopsy/aspiration procedure, the tumor type, patientdemographics, and the percentage of PD-L1 positive tumor cells were recorded. A total of 73 tissue samples and 49 cell blocks were found to beeligible for the study.Results: The PD-L1 positivity score was at least 1% in 44 of 73 samples of the tissue group and 19 of 49 samples of the cell block group. Tissuesamples showed significantly higher positivity compared to the cell blocks (p=0.020). Comparing the frequency of cases with ≥50% positivityshowed no statistically significant difference. A comparison of PD-L1 positivity rates of only the small biopsies and cell blocks also showed nosignificant difference.Conclusion: Although they harbor a limited number of tumor cells, cell blocks prepared from cytologic samples are good alternatives for PD-L1testing. However, large resections should be used for PD-L1 evaluation whenever possible since even 1% positivity may affect the treatmentdecision

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

KULAÇ, İ., BULUTAY, P., FIRAT, P., AYDIN, A. (2022). Efficiency of Cytology Samples for PD-L1 Evaluation and Comparison with Tissue Samples. Türk Patoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 3, 205–210. https://ajindex.com/articles/640416

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (10)

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69:7-34
  2. Ettinger DS, Wood DE, Aisner DL, Akerley W, Bauman J, Chirieac LR, D’Amico TA, Decamp MM, Dilling TJ, Dobelbower M, Doebele RC, Govindan R, Gubens MA, Hennon M, Horn L, Komaki R, Lackner RP, Lanuti M, Leal TA, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer, version 5.2017: Clinical practice guidelines in oncology. JNCCN J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2017;15:504-35
  3. Collisson EA, Campbell JD, Brooks AN, Berger AH, Lee W, Chmielecki J, Beer DG, Cope L, Creighton CJ, Danilova L, Ding L, Getz G, Hammerman PS, Hayes DN, Hernandez B, Herman JG, Heymach J V., Jurisica I, Kucherlapati R, et al. Comprehensive molecular profiling of lung adenocarcinoma: The cancer genome atlas research network. Nature. 2014;511:543-50
  4. Pardoll DM. The blockade of immune checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2012;12:252-64
  5. Sun C, Mezzadra R, Schumacher TN. Regulation and function of the PD-L1 checkpoint. Immunity. 2018;48:434-52
  6. Emens LA, Ascierto PA, Darcy PK, Demaria S, Eggermont AMM, Redmond WL, Seliger B, Marincola FM. Cancer immunotherapy: Opportunities and challenges in the rapidly evolving clinical landscape. Eur J Cancer. 2017;81:116-29
  7. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2020). NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology, Small Cell Lung Cancer. https:// www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/nscl.pdf 8. Rebelatto MC, Midha A, Mistry A, Sabalos C, Schechter N, Li X, Jin X, Steele KE, Robbins PB, Blake-Haskins JA, Walker J. Development of a programmed cell death ligand-1 immunohistochemical assay validated for analysis of non-small cell lung cancer and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Diagn Pathol. 2016;11:95
  8. Gniadek TJ, Li QK, Tully E, Chatterjee S, Nimmagadda S, Gabrielson E. Heterogeneous expression of PD-L1 in pulmonary squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma: Implications for assessment by small biopsy. Mod Pathol. 2017;30:530-8
  9. Bubendorf L, Lantuejoul S, de Langen AJ, Thunnissen E. Nonsmall cell lung carcinoma: Diagnostic difficulties in small biopsies and cytological specimens. Eur Respir Rev. 2017;26:170007
  10. Kitazono S, Fujiwara Y, Tsuta K, Utsumi H, Kanda S, Horinouchi H, Nokihara H, Yamamoto N, Sasada S, Watanabe SI, Asamura H, Tamura T, Ohe Y. Reliability of small biopsy samples compared with resected specimens for the determination of programmed death-ligand 1 expression in non-small-cell lung cancer. Clin Lung Cancer. 2015