Detection of ALK expression in non-small-cell lung cancer with ALK gene rearrangements--comparison of multiple immunohistochemical methods

Are anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) and O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation driver biomarkers of pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and carcinomas (NECs)?

Background: Novel targets in neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs) are needed to improve outcome. The presence of O6-Methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation in NETs and NECs may act as a predictive marker for response on treatment with temozolomide. As anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) plays an important role in the nervous system we hypothesized that ALK rearrangement can act as a biomarker in patients with NETs and NECs.

Materials and Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis to establish the frequency of MGMT promoter methylation and ALK expression in tissue samples of patients with NETs and NECs.

Results: 21% (14/67) of patients tested positive for MGMT promoter methylation. MGMT promoter methylation was present in 33% (3/9) patients with typical carcinoid, in 22% (2/9) patients with atypical carcinoid, in 22% (8/37) patients with small cell lung cancer and in 8% (1/12) patient with large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. ALK- expression was present in 14% (10 of 70 patients). In all of these patients, no ALK-rearrangement nor ALK-mutation was revealed.

Conclusions: Routine testing of NET and NEC samples for an ALK rearrangement is not recommended as ALK-expression is not associated with an ALK-rearrangement. Routine testing of NET and NEC samples for MGMT will detect a promoter hypermethylation in a sizable minority of patients who are eligible for a targeted treatment with temozolomide.

Role of Immunocytochemistry in the Cytological Diagnosis of Pulmonary Tumors

Pulmonary cytology is a challenging diagnostic tool, and it is usually evaluated considering medical history and radiological findings in order to reach an accurate diagnosis. Since the majority of lung cancer patients have an advanced stage at diagnosis, a cytological specimen is frequently the only material available for diagnosis and further prognostic/predictive marker determination. Several types of specimens can be obtained from the respiratory system (including sputum, bronchoalveolar lavage, bronchial brushing, fine needle aspiration, and pleural fluid) with different technical preclinical management protocols and different diagnostic yields. Immunocytochemistry (ICC) has a pivotal role in the determination of diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive markers. Therefore, limited cytology samples are to be used with a cell-sparing approach, to allow both diagnostic ICC evaluation as well as predictive marker assessment by ICC or specific molecular assays. In this review, we describe the most common ICC markers used for the diagnosis and prognostic/predictive characterization of thoracic tumors in different cytological specimens.

A stitch in time saves nine: external quality assessment rounds demonstrate improved quality of biomarker analysis in lung cancer

Biomarker analysis has become routine practice in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). To ensure high quality testing, participation to external quality assessment (EQA) schemes is essential. This article provides a longitudinal overview of the EQA performance for EGFR, ALK, and ROS1 analyses in NSCLC between 2012 and 2015.

The four scheme years were organized by the European Society of Pathology according to the ISO 17043 standard. Participants were asked to analyze the provided tissue using their routine procedures.

Analysis scores improved for individual laboratories upon participation to more EQA schemes, except for ROS1 immunohistochemistry (IHC). For EGFR analysis, scheme error rates were 18.8%, 14.1% and 7.5% in 2013, 2014 and 2015 respectively. For ALK testing, error rates decreased between 2012 and 2015 by 5.2%, 3.2% and 11.8% for the fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), FISH digital, and IHC subschemes, respectively. In contrast, for ROS1 error rates increased between 2014 and 2015 for FISH and IHC by 3.2% and 9.3%. Technical failures decreased over the years for all three markers.

Results show that EQA contributes to an ameliorated performance for most predictive biomarkers in NSCLC. Room for improvement is still present, especially for ROS1 analysis.

NSCLC molecular testing in Central and Eastern European countries

Background

The introduction of targeted treatments for subsets of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has highlighted the importance of accurate molecular diagnosis to determine if an actionable genetic alteration is present. Few data are available for Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) on mutation rates, testing rates, and compliance with testing guidelines.

Methods

A questionnaire about molecular testing and NSCLC management was distributed to relevant specialists in nine CEE countries, and pathologists were asked to provide the results of EGFR and ALK testing over a 1-year period.

Results

A very high proportion of lung cancer cases are confirmed histologically/cytologically (75–100%), and molecular testing of NSCLC samples has been established in all evaluated CEE countries in 2014. Most countries follow national or international guidelines on which patients to test for EGFR mutations and ALK rearrangements. In most centers at that time, testing was undertaken on request of the clinician rather than on the preferred reflex basis. Immunohistochemistry, followed by fluorescent in situ hybridization confirmation of positive cases, has been widely adopted for ALK testing in the region. Limited reimbursement is a significant barrier to molecular testing in the region and a disincentive to reflex testing. Multidisciplinary tumor boards are established in most of the countries and centers, with 75–100% of cases being discussed at a multidisciplinary tumor board at specialized centers.

Conclusions

Molecular testing is established throughout the CEE region, but improved and unbiased reimbursement remains a major challenge for the future. Increasing the number of patients reviewed by multidisciplinary boards outside of major centers and access to targeted therapy based on the result of molecular testing are other major challenges.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4023-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Updated Molecular Testing Guideline for the Selection of Lung Cancer Patients for Treatment With Targeted Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: Guideline From the College of American Pathologists, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and the Association for Molecular Pathology

CONTEXT

- In 2013, an evidence-based guideline was published by the College of American Pathologists, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and the Association for Molecular Pathology to set standards for the molecular analysis of lung cancers to guide treatment decisions with targeted inhibitors. New evidence has prompted an evaluation of additional laboratory technologies, targetable genes, patient populations, and tumor types for testing.

OBJECTIVE

- To systematically review and update the 2013 guideline to affirm its validity; to assess the evidence of new genetic discoveries, technologies, and therapies; and to issue an evidence-based update.

DESIGN

- The College of American Pathologists, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and the Association for Molecular Pathology convened an expert panel to develop an evidence-based guideline to help define the key questions and literature search terms, review abstracts and full articles, and draft recommendations.

RESULTS

- Eighteen new recommendations were drafted. The panel also updated 3 recommendations from the 2013 guideline.

CONCLUSIONS

- The 2013 guideline was largely reaffirmed with updated recommendations to allow testing of cytology samples, require improved assay sensitivity, and recommend against the use of immunohistochemistry for EGFR testing. Key new recommendations include ROS1 testing for all adenocarcinoma patients; the inclusion of additional genes ( ERBB2, MET, BRAF, KRAS, and RET) for laboratories that perform next-generation sequencing panels; immunohistochemistry as an alternative to fluorescence in situ hybridization for ALK and/or ROS1 testing; use of 5% sensitivity assays for EGFR T790M mutations in patients with secondary resistance to EGFR inhibitors; and the use of cell-free DNA to "rule in" targetable mutations when tissue is limited or hard to obtain.

Updated Molecular Testing Guideline for the Selection of Lung Cancer Patients for Treatment With Targeted Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: Guideline From the College of American Pathologists, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and the Association for Molecular Pathology

CONTEXT

In 2013, an evidence-based guideline was published by the College of American Pathologists, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and the Association for Molecular Pathology to set standards for the molecular analysis of lung cancers to guide treatment decisions with targeted inhibitors. New evidence has prompted an evaluation of additional laboratory technologies, targetable genes, patient populations, and tumor types for testing.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review and update the 2013 guideline to affirm its validity; to assess the evidence of new genetic discoveries, technologies, and therapies; and to issue an evidence-based update.

DESIGN

The College of American Pathologists, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and the Association for Molecular Pathology convened an expert panel to develop an evidence-based guideline to help define the key questions and literature search terms, review abstracts and full articles, and draft recommendations.

RESULTS

Eighteen new recommendations were drafted. The panel also updated 3 recommendations from the 2013 guideline.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2013 guideline was largely reaffirmed with updated recommendations to allow testing of cytology samples, require improved assay sensitivity, and recommend against the use of immunohistochemistry for EGFR testing. Key new recommendations include ROS1 testing for all adenocarcinoma patients; the inclusion of additional genes (ERBB2, MET, BRAF, KRAS, and RET) for laboratories that perform next-generation sequencing panels; immunohistochemistry as an alternative to fluorescence in situ hybridization for ALK and/or ROS1 testing; use of 5% sensitivity assays for EGFR T790M mutations in patients with secondary resistance to EGFR inhibitors; and the use of cell-free DNA to "rule in" targetable mutations when tissue is limited or hard to obtain.

Updated Molecular Testing Guideline for the Selection of Lung Cancer Patients for Treatment With Targeted Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: Guideline From the College of American Pathologists, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and the Association for Molecular Pathology

CONTEXT

In 2013, an evidence-based guideline was published by the College of American Pathologists, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and the Association for Molecular Pathology to set standards for the molecular analysis of lung cancers to guide treatment decisions with targeted inhibitors. New evidence has prompted an evaluation of additional laboratory technologies, targetable genes, patient populations, and tumor types for testing.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review and update the 2013 guideline to affirm its validity; to assess the evidence of new genetic discoveries, technologies, and therapies; and to issue an evidence-based update.

DESIGN

The College of American Pathologists, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and the Association for Molecular Pathology convened an expert panel to develop an evidence-based guideline to help define the key questions and literature search terms, review abstracts and full articles, and draft recommendations.

RESULTS

Eighteen new recommendations were drafted. The panel also updated 3 recommendations from the 2013 guideline.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2013 guideline was largely reaffirmed with updated recommendations to allow testing of cytology samples, require improved assay sensitivity, and recommend against the use of immunohistochemistry for EGFR testing. Key new recommendations include ROS1 testing for all adenocarcinoma patients; the inclusion of additional genes (ERBB2, MET, BRAF, KRAS, and RET) for laboratories that perform next-generation sequencing panels; immunohistochemistry as an alternative to fluorescence in situ hybridization for ALK and/or ROS1 testing; use of 5% sensitivity assays for EGFR T790M mutations in patients with secondary resistance to EGFR inhibitors; and the use of cell-free DNA to "rule in" targetable mutations when tissue is limited or hard to obtain.

ALK FISH patterns and the detection of ALK fusions by next generation sequencing in lung adenocarcinoma

Break-apart ALK FISH probe is the FDA approved approach for detection of ALK rearrangements in lung carcinoma patients who may benefit from ALK kinase inhibitors. The FISH assay can be technically challenging and difficult to interpret. ALK immunohistochemistry and next generation sequencing have been proposed as alternative approaches. In this study, we compared various ALK –FISH patterns to next –generation sequencing (NGS) for gene fusion detection, ALK immunohistochemistry (IHC) and tumor responses to crizotinib. 72 (4%) of 2116 lung adenocarcinoma were positive by ALK- FISH. Of 28 ALK-FISH positive cases selected for the study, FISH patterns included 15 (54%) cases with split signal, 10 (36%) with single orange signal and 3 (10%) with “mixed pattern”. 12 (80%) cases with split signal and 4 (40%) cases with single orange signal were positive by NGS and IHC, while mixed cases were all negative. Mutation analysis of discordant cases revealed multiple mutations including oncogenic mutations in EGFR, KRAS, BRAF and ATM genes. All discordant cases in groups with split and mixed signal showed a lower number of cells with rearrangement (mean 28.5%; range 20.5-36.9%). No statistically significant association between response to crizotinib and FISH patterns was observed (p=0.73). In contrast, NGS fusion positive cases were associated with more responses to crizotinib than NGS negative cases (p= 0.016). Our study suggests that ALK FISH alone may not be the most reliable assay for detection of ALK gene rearrangements, and probably should be used in parallel with ALK IHC and NGS for detection of gene fusions and mutations.

Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase Testing: IHC vs. FISH vs. NGS

OPINION STATEMENT

Personalized targeted therapy has emerged as a promising strategy in lung cancer treatment, with current attention focused on elucidation and detection of oncogenic drivers responsible for tumor initiation and maintenance and development of drug resistance. In lung cancer, several oncogenic drivers have been reported, triggering the application of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) to target these dysfunctional genes. The anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement is responsible for about 4-7% of all non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs) and perhaps as high as a third in specific patient populations such as younger, male, non-smokers with advanced stage, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene (KRAS) wild type, and signet ring cell adenocarcinoma with abundant intracytoplasmic mucin. The selection of patients based on their ALK status is vital on account of the high response rates with the ALK-targeted agents in this subset of patients. Standardization and validation of ALK rearrangement detection methods is essential for accurate and reproducible results. There are currently three detection methods widely available in clinical practice, including fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH), immunohistochemistry (IHC), and polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based next generation sequencing (NGS) technology. However, the choice of diagnostic methodology for ALK rearrangement detection in clinical practice remains a matter of debate. With accumulating data enumerating the advantages and disadvantages of each of the three methods, combining more than one testing method for ALK fusion detection may be beneficial for patients. In this review, we will discuss the current methods used in ALK rearrangement detection with emphasis on their key advantages and disadvantages.

Immunohistochemistry for predictive biomarkers in non-small cell lung cancer

In the era of targeted therapy, predictive biomarker testing has become increasingly important for non-small cell lung cancer. Of multiple predictive biomarker testing methods, immunohistochemistry (IHC) is widely available and technically less challenging, can provide clinically meaningful results with a rapid turn-around-time and is more cost efficient than molecular platforms. In fact, several IHC assays for predictive biomarkers have already been implemented in routine pathology practice. In this review, we will discuss: (I) the details of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) and proto-oncogene tyrosine-protein kinase ROS (ROS1) IHC assays including the performance of multiple antibody clones, pros and cons of IHC platforms and various scoring systems to design an optimal algorithm for predictive biomarker testing; (II) issues associated with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) IHC assays; (III) appropriate pre-analytical tissue handling and selection of optimal tissue samples for predictive biomarker IHC.

Immunohistochemistry of Pulmonary Biomarkers: A Perspective From Members of the Pulmonary Pathology Society

The use of immunohistochemistry for the determination of pulmonary carcinoma biomarkers is a well-established and powerful technique. Immunohistochemisty is readily available in pathology laboratories, is relatively easy to perform and assess, can provide clinically meaningful results very quickly, and is relatively inexpensive. Pulmonary predictive biomarkers provide results essential for timely and accurate therapeutic decision making; for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, predictive immunohistochemistry includes ALK and programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) (ROS1, EGFR in Europe) testing. Handling along proper methodologic lines is needed to ensure patients receive the most accurate and representative test outcomes.

Nonsmall cell lung carcinoma: diagnostic difficulties in small biopsies and cytological specimens

The pathological and molecular classification of lung cancer has become substantially more complex over the past decade. For diagnostic purposes on small samples, additional stains are frequently required to distinguish between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma. Subsequently, for advanced nonsquamous cell nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) patients, predictive analyses on epidermal growth factor receptor, anaplastic lymphoma kinase and ROS1 are required. In NSCLCs negative for these biomarkers, programmed death ligand-1 immunohistochemistry is performed. Small samples (biopsy and cytology) require “tissue” management, which is best achieved by the interaction of all physicians involved.

ALK Immunohistochemistry for ALK Gene Rearrangement Screening in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) immunohistochemistry (IHC) for ALK gene rearrangement in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) through systematic review, meta-analysis and diagnostic test accuracy review.

Methods

The current study included 11,806 NSCLC cases in 42 eligible studies. We performed concordance analyses between ALK IHC and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). The diagnostic accuracy of ALK IHC was analyzed based on ALK IHC criteria and antibodies.

Results

The overall ALK IHC results were positive in 13.2%. The overall concordance rate between ALK IHC and FISH was 0.950 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.927-0.966). In the ALK IHC-positive and negative groups, the concordance rates were 0.805 (95% CI 0.733-0.861) and 0.985 (95% CI 0.978-0.990), respectively. The ALK FISH-positive rates were 0.009 (95% CI 0.004-0.023), 0.378 (95% CI 0.217-0.572), 0.628 (95% CI 0.420-0.796) and 0.900 (95% CI 0.840-0.939) in the ALK IHC 0, 1+, 2+ and 3+ groups, respectively. In diagnostic test accuracy review for ALK IHC, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.92 (95% CI 0.89-0.94) and 0.91 (95% CI 0.90-0.91), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio and the area under the curve on the summary receiver operating characteristic curve were 266.56 (95% CI 110.83-641.14) and 0.983, respectively.

Conclusions

Our results suggested that ALK IHC equivocal (score 1+ and 2+) cases should not be considered as IHC-negative in screening for ALK gene rearrangement. Additional detailed criteria for ALK IHC equivocal cases are necessary to determine how to best apply this approach in daily practice.

ALK ambiguous-positive non-small cell lung cancers are tumors challenged by diagnostic and therapeutic issues

Searching for ALK rearrangements using the approved fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) test and complementary immunohistochemistry (IHC) has become the rule to treat patients with advanced non‑small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with anti‑ALK targeted therapy. The concordance between the two techniques is reported to be strong but imperfect. We report our experience with cases of ALK‑rearranged lung adenocarcinomas pointing out particularly ambiguous cases. FISH and IHC data on ALK but also c‑MET IHC as well as EGFR and KRAS mutation screening are considered, together with response to crizotinib treatment. We classified the 55 FISH ALK‑rearranged tumors into two groups according to the FISH and IHC results: a concordant FISH+IHC+ group (31 tumors) and an ambiguous group (24 tumors). These tumors were considered as 'ambiguous' ALK‑positive due to negative (21 tumors) or non‑contributive (3 tumors) IHC. In addition, the percentage of FISH-positive nuclei was between 15 and 20% in 17 tumors belonging to one or the other group (now called borderline tumors). We discuss the accuracy of the different tests with intent to determine whether ambiguous and borderline tumors are real positive ALK‑rearranged tumors. To conclude, ambiguous ALK‑positive lung cancers are challenging tumors with diagnosis and therapeutic issues that can justify parallel FISH, IHC and molecular screening strategy.

Unlocking the potential of CD70 as a novel immunotherapeutic target for non-small cell lung cancer

Although normally restricted to activated T and B cells and mature dendritic cells, constitutive expression of CD70, a member of the tumor necrosis family, has been described in both hematological and solid tumors, where it increases tumor cell and regulatory T cell survival by signaling through its receptor, CD27.

We have assessed the co-expression of CD70 and CD27 in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) by immunohistochemistry to explore a correlation between expression of the protein and tumor histologic subtype, genetic aberrations and prognosis. Furthermore, we tested the ability of ARGX-110, a CD70-blocking antibody, to induce NK cell-mediated cytotoxicity.

Our results revealed CD70 expression on the surface of both primary and metastatic NSCLC tumor cells and in the tumor microenvironment. Moreover, CD27-expressing tumor infiltrating lymphocytes were found adjacent to the tumor cells, suggesting active CD70-mediated signaling. Finally, we have shown that ARGX-110, has potent cytotoxic effects on CD70⁺ NSCLC cell lines.

Screening for ALK in non-small cell lung carcinomas: 5A4 and D5F3 antibodies perform equally well, but combined use with FISH is recommended

OBJECTIVES

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) has become a promising method for pre-screening ALK-rearrangements in non-small cell lung carcinomas (NSCLC). Various ALK antibodies, detection systems and automated immunostainers are available. We therefore aimed to compare the performance of the monoclonal 5A4 (Novocastra, Leica) and D5F3 (Cell Signaling, Ventana) antibodies using two different immunostainers. Additionally we analyzed the accuracy of prospective ALK IHC-testing in routine diagnostics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-two NSCLC with available ALK FISH results and enriched for FISH-positive carcinomas were retrospectively analyzed. IHC was performed on BenchMarkXT (Ventana) using 5A4 and D5F3, respectively, and additionally with 5A4 on Bond-MAX (Leica). Data from our routine diagnostics on prospective ALK-testing with parallel IHC, using 5A4, and FISH were available from 303 NSCLC.

RESULTS

All three IHC protocols showed congruent results. Only 1/25 FISH-positive NSCLC (4%) was false negative by IHC. For all three IHC protocols the sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) compared to FISH were 96%, 100%, 100% and 97.8%, respectively. In the prospective cohort 3/32 FISH-positive (9.4%) and 2/271 FISH-negative (0.7%) NSCLC were false negative and false positive by IHC, respectively. In routine diagnostics the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of IHC compared to FISH were 90.6%, 99.3%, 93.5% and 98.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

5A4 and D5F3 are equally well suited for detecting ALK-rearranged NSCLC. BenchMark and BOND-MAX immunostainers can be used for IHC with 5A4. True discrepancies between IHC and FISH results do exist and need to be addressed when implementing IHC in an ALK-testing algorithm.

The relevance of external quality assessment for molecular testing for ALK positive non-small cell lung cancer: results from two pilot rounds show room for optimization

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Molecular profiling should be performed on all advanced non-small cell lung cancer with non-squamous histology to allow treatment selection. Currently, this should include EGFR mutation testing and testing for ALK rearrangements. ROS1 is another emerging target. ALK rearrangement status is a critical biomarker to predict response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as crizotinib. To promote high quality testing in non-small cell lung cancer, the European Society of Pathology has introduced an external quality assessment scheme. This article summarizes the results of the first two pilot rounds organized in 2012-2013.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Tissue microarray slides consisting of cell-lines and resection specimens were distributed with the request for routine ALK testing using IHC or FISH. Participation in ALK FISH testing included the interpretation of four digital FISH images.

RESULTS

Data from 173 different laboratories was obtained. Results demonstrate decreased error rates in the second round for both ALK FISH and ALK IHC, although the error rates were still high and the need for external quality assessment in laboratories performing ALK testing is evident. Error rates obtained by FISH were lower than by IHC. The lowest error rates were observed for the interpretation of digital FISH images.

CONCLUSION

There was a large variety in FISH enumeration practices. Based on the results from this study, recommendations for the methodology, analysis, interpretation and result reporting were issued. External quality assessment is a crucial element to improve the quality of molecular testing.

Biomarker testing in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a National Consensus of the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology

In 2011, the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology and the Spanish Society of Pathology started a joint project to establish recommendations on biomarker testing in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer based on the current evidence. Most of these recommendations are still valid, but new evidence requires some aspects to be updated. Specifically, the recommendation about which biomarkers to test in which patients is being amended, and the best way to manage tumour samples and minimum requirements for biomarker test material are defined. Suitable techniques for testing for epidermal growth factor receptor mutations and anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearrangement are also reviewed, and a consensus is reached on which situations warrant re-biopsy.