ArticleBritish journal of biomedical science2026
Training on PD-L1 scoring in non-small cell lung cancer with high intra- and inter-reader agreement: results of a worldwide microscopic/digital image-based training of 751 pathologists.
Article in British journal of biomedical science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Semi-quantitative scoring of PD-L1 expression on tumor cells (TCs) and/or infiltrating immune cells (ICs) is complex and requires expert pathologist training to reduce inter- and intra-reader variability. We conducted a 1- or 2-day training of 751 pathologists world-wide from 63 countries over a period of 2 years (2016 and 2017). Pathologists read microscopic slides or fully digitized slides stained with PD-L1 immunohistochemistry 22C3 pharmDx assay with expression levels enriched around the clinically relevant cutoffs of 1% and 50% in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The overall inter-reader agreement (OPA) for PD-L1-stained NSCLC was 95.6% for TPS ≥1% and 87.3% for TPS ≥50% cut-off. The corresponding intra-reader agreement was 95.9% for the ≥1% and 91.4% for the ≥50% cut-off. The inter-reader negative percent agreement (NPA) for TPS ≥1% was 85.6% and 91.9% for the TPS ≥50% cut-off, and the positive percent agreement (PPA) was 97.6% (TPS ≥1%) and 81.0% (TPS ≥50%). The observed high inter- and intra-reader agreements are promising given the difficulty of reproducible scoring tumor cells with heterogeneous distribution of PD-L1 staining combined with the varied professional training, expertise, and experience of the participants. The results may reflect the utility of the expert led standardized protocol used to train pathologists for scoring PD-L1 staining in NSCLC specimens. The digital image-led training approach has the additional advantage of providing a computer-assisted scoring system and allows for remote training of pathologists worldwide.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.