Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30760860›Full record

ArticleModern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc2019

Immunohistochemical detection of PD-L1 among diverse human neoplasms in a reference laboratory: observations based upon 62,896 cases.

Dennis P O'Malley, Yuhang Yang, Saskia Boisot, Sucha Sudarsanam, Jian-Feng Wang, Vladislav Chizhevsky, Guohua Zhao, Shehla Arain, Lawrence M Weiss

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Dennis P O'MalleyDepartment of Pathology, NeoGenomics Laboratories, Aliso Viejo, CA, USA. dennis.omalley@neogenomics.com.
Yuhang YangDepartment of Pathology, NeoGenomics Laboratories, Aliso Viejo, CA, USA.
Saskia BoisotDepartment of Pathology, NeoGenomics Laboratories, Aliso Viejo, CA, USA.
Sucha SudarsanamDepartment of Pathology, NeoGenomics Laboratories, Aliso Viejo, CA, USA.
Jian-Feng WangDepartment of Pathology, NeoGenomics Laboratories, Aliso Viejo, CA, USA.
Vladislav ChizhevskyDepartment of Pathology, NeoGenomics Laboratories, Aliso Viejo, CA, USA.
Guohua ZhaoDepartment of Pathology, NeoGenomics Laboratories, Aliso Viejo, CA, USA.
Shehla ArainDepartment of Pathology, NeoGenomics Laboratories, Aliso Viejo, CA, USA.
Lawrence M WeissDepartment of Pathology, NeoGenomics Laboratories, Aliso Viejo, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Targeting of the PD1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint pathway has rapidly gained acceptance as a therapeutic strategy for a growing number of malignancies. Testing for expression of PD-L1 in tumor cells and immune cells has been used as a companion or complementary test for drugs targeting the PD1/PD-L1 pathway. We evaluated the results of PD-L1 testing in a large reference lab cohort. Using Food and Drug Administration-approved methods and interpretive instructions for each individual test, 62,896 cases were evaluated for PD-L1 using antibody clone 22C3, 28-8, SP142, or SP263. Case data analyzed included test results and information on tumor location and clinical history. No clinical outcome information was available and no attempt was made to correlate PD-L1 results with any other tests performed. The following numbers of cases were evaluated: 22C3 with tumor proportion score [n = 52585], 22C3 with combined positive score [n = 2631], 28-8 [n = 4191], SP142 [n = 850], and SP263 [n = 70]. In 22C3/tumor proportion score cases, the general results were as follows: negative 33.1% (n = 17,405), (low) expression 33.9% (n = 17,822), and high expression 29.5% (n = 15,486). In cases identified as metastatic, the results were as follows: negative 35.9% (n = 1411), (low) expression 30.8% (n = 1211), and high expression 30.7% (n = 1208). We found broad ranges of expression in tumor types with increasing positivity, as adenocarcinomas were reported as poorly differentiated, whereas squamous cell carcinomas showed more positivity as tumors were described as well-differentiated. The results of many individual tumor types were evaluated and showed, in general, high levels of positive expression. Practical challenges and observations of PD-L1 stain results and interpretation are also discussed.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overB7-H1 AntigenBiomarkers, TumorChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryInfantMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsYoung AdultB7-H1 AntigenBiomarkers, TumorCD274 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID30760860
PMCPMC6760643

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.