ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2022
Programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemical assessment using the QR1 clone in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinomas: a comparison with reference clones 22C3 and SP263.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Interchangeability of PD-L1 Immunohistochemistry Assays in First-Line Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Management With Cemiplimab.JCO precision oncology · 2025Trial
- Artificial Intelligence (AI) for Programmed Death Ligand-1 (PD-L1) Immunohistochemical Assessment in Urothelial Carcinomas: "Teaching" Cell Differentiation to AI Systems.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemical (IHC) status is used to predict which patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) will respond to immunotherapy. We aimed to compare QR1(Quartett), 22C3 (Dako), and SP263 (Ventana) detection of PD-L1 expression in muscle-invasive UCs and determine the best scoring algorithm for assessment of PD-L1 expression when using the QR1 clone. Our study included 69 UCs. For SP263 and 22C3, PD-L1-positive tumor cell (TC) and/or immune cell (IC) percentages (TC%/IC%) and the Combined Positive Score (CPS) were assessed, respectively (positivity cut-offs of ≥ 25% and ≥ 10). For QR1, both interpretation systems were evaluated. The concordances between assays were calculated. PD-L1 IHC staining characteristics were comparable between QR1, 22C3, and SP263 in both conventional and variant histology UCs. We demonstrated strong or very strong correlations between clones; the strongest correlation for TCs was between QR1 and SP263 (r = 0.92; p = 0.001) and for ICs was between QR1 and 22C3 (r = 0.85; p = 0.001). Our comparative analysis of the scoring algorithms revealed very good concordances among the three assays (range 0.791-0.878); the highest concordance was between QR1 and SP263 when CPS was used as the scoring algorithm for QR1 (0.878; p < 0.001). Our study is the first to demonstrate that the QR1 clone can be used to evaluate PD-L1 status in UCs, with a very good agreement rate with the reference clones. QR1 appeared to be more similar to the SP263 clone. With regard to the scoring algorithm, when evaluating PD-L1 expression using QR1 clone, CPS performed better compared with the TC%/IC% score.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34669047What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.