Aims: Several studies have demonstrated analytical comparability between different PD-L1 assays, but their clinical validity in non-small-cell lung cancer in terms of response to treatment outside clinical trials has not been established. The aim of our study is to assess the analytical performance of laboratory-developed tests for Ventana SP263 and Agilent/Dako 22C3, and to investigate the association between PD-L1 assays and response to PD-1/L1 inhibitors.
Methods and results: PD-L1 SP263 and 22C3 assays were performed on 302 consecutive non-small-cell lung carcinoma samples Both assays were optimised for use on the automated Ventana BenchMark Ultra platform. Scoring algorithms for staining of the tumour cells using the established cut-offs were applied to all samples. Best overall response (BOR) for 44 patients treated with either nivolumab, pembrolizumab or atezolizumab were assessed using recist version 1.1 and correlated with PD-L1 assay results. Assays showed good agreement, with a concordance correlation coefficient of 0.86 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.82-0.90)]. Comparing the assays using cut-offs of 1%, 5%, 10%, 1-49% and ≥50% showed an association between the two assays (P < 0.0001). The SP263 10% cut-off (P = 0.032) was associated with BOR, whereas the 1% (P = 0.087) and 5% (P = 0.051) cut-offs were not. In contrast 22C3, cut-offs of 1% (P = 0.019), 5% (P = 0.025) and 10% (P = 0.014) were all associated with BOR.
Conclusions: The SP263 and 22C3 LDTs demonstrated good analytical concordance, and correlation with response to PD-1/L1 inhibitors.
Keywords: laboratory-developed assay; programmed death ligand 1; response; validation.
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.