在澳大利亚实施PD-L1能力测试项目的挑战

Q4 Neuroscience Vascular Cell Pub Date : 2018-12-28 DOI:10.24238/13221-10-1-180
J. Pagliuso, S. Parry, Z. Haffajee, T. Badrick, Keith W. Miller
{"title":"在澳大利亚实施PD-L1能力测试项目的挑战","authors":"J. Pagliuso, S. Parry, Z. Haffajee, T. Badrick, Keith W. Miller","doi":"10.24238/13221-10-1-180","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Julia Pagliuso, Suzanne Parry, Zenobia Haffajee, Tony Badrick, Keith Miller Background . One important initiative that commenced at the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Program (RCPAQAP) in 2017 was the collaboration with United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Scheme (UK NEQAS) Immunocytochemistry (ICC) and In-Situ Hybridization (ISH) for the challenging implementation of a PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) proficiency testing program for non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). A RCPAQAP participant survey in 2016 showed that only eight laboratories were performing PD-L1 testing. The aim of the collaboration was to increase the sample size of the pilot program to provide meaningful results that could be reported back to RCPAQAP participants with appropriate recommendations. Other challenges of assessment included standardising the clinical cut-offs for positivity for each commercial assay, interpretation of laboratory developed tests (LDTs), using appropriate tissue to cover the critical interpretation points for each assay, interchangeability of clones and interpretation proficiency testing. Methods . The use of a ‘Gold Standard’ for each commercial assay was used as a baseline to compare participant results and tumour proportion score bin categories were implemented to harmonise interpretation across clones. Conclusions . The findings of the pre-pilot test suggest that the use of a clinically validated PD-L1 IHC assay performs better during assessment than adopting a laboratory developed test (LDT). The assessment committee also concluded that tonsil showed a better dynamic range of positivity than placenta. It was acknowledged that participants are limited by the platforms they have available and so it was suggested that validating an optimal method against the clinical assay and continual verification of the test may produce the expected result. The next big challenge is to extend proficiency testing from technical to interpretation. This is being implemented globally via the International Quality Network for Pathology (IQNPath) with participation through local External Quality Assurance programs, including RCPAQAP.","PeriodicalId":23948,"journal":{"name":"Vascular Cell","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Challenges of Implementing a PD-L1 Proficiency Testing Program in Australia\",\"authors\":\"J. Pagliuso, S. Parry, Z. Haffajee, T. Badrick, Keith W. Miller\",\"doi\":\"10.24238/13221-10-1-180\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Julia Pagliuso, Suzanne Parry, Zenobia Haffajee, Tony Badrick, Keith Miller Background . One important initiative that commenced at the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Program (RCPAQAP) in 2017 was the collaboration with United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Scheme (UK NEQAS) Immunocytochemistry (ICC) and In-Situ Hybridization (ISH) for the challenging implementation of a PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) proficiency testing program for non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). A RCPAQAP participant survey in 2016 showed that only eight laboratories were performing PD-L1 testing. The aim of the collaboration was to increase the sample size of the pilot program to provide meaningful results that could be reported back to RCPAQAP participants with appropriate recommendations. Other challenges of assessment included standardising the clinical cut-offs for positivity for each commercial assay, interpretation of laboratory developed tests (LDTs), using appropriate tissue to cover the critical interpretation points for each assay, interchangeability of clones and interpretation proficiency testing. Methods . The use of a ‘Gold Standard’ for each commercial assay was used as a baseline to compare participant results and tumour proportion score bin categories were implemented to harmonise interpretation across clones. Conclusions . The findings of the pre-pilot test suggest that the use of a clinically validated PD-L1 IHC assay performs better during assessment than adopting a laboratory developed test (LDT). The assessment committee also concluded that tonsil showed a better dynamic range of positivity than placenta. It was acknowledged that participants are limited by the platforms they have available and so it was suggested that validating an optimal method against the clinical assay and continual verification of the test may produce the expected result. The next big challenge is to extend proficiency testing from technical to interpretation. This is being implemented globally via the International Quality Network for Pathology (IQNPath) with participation through local External Quality Assurance programs, including RCPAQAP.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23948,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vascular Cell\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vascular Cell\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24238/13221-10-1-180\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Neuroscience\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vascular Cell","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24238/13221-10-1-180","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Neuroscience","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Julia Pagliuso, Suzanne Parry, Zenobia Haffajee, Tony Badrick, Keith Miller2017年,澳大利亚皇家病理学家学院质量保证计划(RCPAQAP)启动了一项重要举措,即与英国国家外部质量评估计划(UK NEQAS)免疫细胞化学(ICC)和原位杂交(ISH)合作,以挑战性地实施非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的PD-L1免疫组织化学(IHC)能力测试计划。2016年RCPAQAP参与者调查显示,只有8家实验室进行PD-L1检测。合作的目的是增加试点项目的样本量,以提供有意义的结果,并向RCPAQAP参与者报告并提供适当的建议。评估的其他挑战包括使每种商业化验的阳性临床截止标准标准化、实验室开发的化验(LDTs)的解释、使用适当的组织覆盖每种化验的关键解释点、克隆的互换性和解释能力测试。方法。使用每个商业测定的“金标准”作为基线来比较参与者的结果,并实施肿瘤比例评分bin类别以协调跨克隆的解释。结论。预先导试验的结果表明,在评估过程中,使用临床验证的PD-L1免疫组化检测比采用实验室开发的检测(LDT)效果更好。评估委员会还得出结论,扁桃体比胎盘表现出更好的动态阳性范围。与会者承认,参与者受到现有平台的限制,因此建议针对临床分析验证最佳方法并不断验证测试可能产生预期结果。下一个重大挑战是将熟练程度测试从技术测试扩展到口译测试。这是通过国际病理质量网络(IQNPath)在全球范围内实施的,并通过当地的外部质量保证计划(包括RCPAQAP)参与。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Challenges of Implementing a PD-L1 Proficiency Testing Program in Australia
Julia Pagliuso, Suzanne Parry, Zenobia Haffajee, Tony Badrick, Keith Miller Background . One important initiative that commenced at the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Quality Assurance Program (RCPAQAP) in 2017 was the collaboration with United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Scheme (UK NEQAS) Immunocytochemistry (ICC) and In-Situ Hybridization (ISH) for the challenging implementation of a PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) proficiency testing program for non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). A RCPAQAP participant survey in 2016 showed that only eight laboratories were performing PD-L1 testing. The aim of the collaboration was to increase the sample size of the pilot program to provide meaningful results that could be reported back to RCPAQAP participants with appropriate recommendations. Other challenges of assessment included standardising the clinical cut-offs for positivity for each commercial assay, interpretation of laboratory developed tests (LDTs), using appropriate tissue to cover the critical interpretation points for each assay, interchangeability of clones and interpretation proficiency testing. Methods . The use of a ‘Gold Standard’ for each commercial assay was used as a baseline to compare participant results and tumour proportion score bin categories were implemented to harmonise interpretation across clones. Conclusions . The findings of the pre-pilot test suggest that the use of a clinically validated PD-L1 IHC assay performs better during assessment than adopting a laboratory developed test (LDT). The assessment committee also concluded that tonsil showed a better dynamic range of positivity than placenta. It was acknowledged that participants are limited by the platforms they have available and so it was suggested that validating an optimal method against the clinical assay and continual verification of the test may produce the expected result. The next big challenge is to extend proficiency testing from technical to interpretation. This is being implemented globally via the International Quality Network for Pathology (IQNPath) with participation through local External Quality Assurance programs, including RCPAQAP.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Vascular Cell
Vascular Cell Neuroscience-Neurology
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A 3-Dimensional Hypothesis of Oxidative Phosphorylation The long and winding road: detecting and quantifying Notch activation in endothelial cells Vascular Tumors Result from Adeno-Associated Virus-9 Angiogenic Gene Therapy of Bone Allografts A clinically relevant model of stroke using aged rats The SARS-CoV2 - ACE2 link: a physiopathological analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1