Post on 08-Aug-2019
Specialespecifikt kursus i Patologisk Anatomi 2018
Diagnostiske metoder Immunhistokemi
1. External Quality Assurance
Prof. Mogens VybergNordiQCInstitute of PathologyAalborg, Denmark
IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY IN CANCER DIAGNOSTICS
• IHC - ancillary test, mostly used in the analysis and classification of tumours
• Antibody panels with diagnoses based on staining patterns (‘algorithms’)
• Relatively organ/tissue restricted transcription factors, has improved the accuracy of tumour diagnoses
• TTF-1, CDX2, PAX8, GATA3, p40 . . .
• IHC as a rapid and inexpensive surrogate for molecular studies: Mutations may give rise to• Occurrence of mutation-specific proteins
• BRAF, ALK, IDH1 …• Overexpression of proteins
• HER2, p53 …• Loss of proteins
• MMRPs, SMAD4, E-cad, INI1, ATRX …• Protein accumulations in an abnormal
cell compartment• Beta-catenin
• Predictive markers make IHC a stand-alone key to correct targeted therapy
• ER, PR, HER2, Ki67, PD-L1 …
IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY IN CANCER DIAGNOSTICS
”Next generation immunohistochemistry”
Diagnostic utility of IHC may be hampered by• Preanalytical issues• (e.g., poor, short or delayed fixation; decalcification)
• Analytic issues:• Less successful or too dilute antibody clones/RTUs• Insufficient epitope retrieval• Insensitive visualization systems• Platform problems
• Post-analytical issues • (e.g. interpretation, reporting, image analysis)
IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY IN CANCER DIAGNOSIS
• International organization for quality assurance of IHC• Founded 2003 by Nordic pathologists • Independent, scientific, not-for-profit organisation • Institute of Pathology, Aalborg University Hospital, DK
• General module: 3 runs/year• 15-18 different marker challenges
• Breast cancer IHC module: 2 runs/y• HER-2, ER/PR, Ki67/E-Cad …
• HER-2 ISH module: 2 runs/year• BRISH, FISH
• Companion module 2017-• PD-L1 / Lung cancer ….
Nordic Immunohistochemical Quality Control
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
Nordic immunohistochemical Quality Control
NordiQC Participants
Nordic labs
2015-18
WWW.NORDIQC.ORGFREE ACCESS
Free PMC Article
Nordic immunohistochemical Quality Control
Serial sections stained for Estrogen receptor
Lab. A Lab. B
Optimally processed ductalbreast carcinoma tissue
Serial sections stained for Estrogen receptor
Lab. A Lab. B
False neg.
High expressor
Low expressor
11
Serial sections stained for Estrogen receptorUterine cervix
Lab. A Lab. B
False neg.
Tonsil
Controls
Uterine cervix
Tonsil
12
Serial sections stained for Estrogen receptor
Clone 6F11 in 15/37 labsClone SP1/EP1/1D5 in 225 labs
False pos.(mRNA=0)
ExternalQualityAssurance !
Uterine cervix Uterine cervix
Tonsil Tonsil
13
Control
correct false negative
External Quality Assurance – ER
Craig Allred
“Through the inquiry, the public learned that between 1997 and 2005 nearly 400 of about 1,000 breast cancer patients receivedincorrect test results of the ER status of their breast tumors.”
External Quality Assessment
Suboptimal IHC assays may be due to:• Preanalytical issues
• Fixation too short, too late, decalcification too soon…• Analytical issues:
• Less successful / too dilute antibody clones/RTUs• Insufficient epitope retrieval• Insensitive visualization systems• Platform problems
• Post-analytical issues • Interpretation criteria, interobserver variation …
The challenge of IHC
Should beidentified
with proper controls
h
Lung+
Uroth
17
WW
W.N
ORDIQ
C.ORG
Participant site
Alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase CyclinD1 MLH1
Alpha-smooth muscle actin Cytokeratin 5 MSH2
Anaplastic lymphoma kinase Cytokeratin 7 MSH6
B-cell specific activator protein Cytokeratin 19 Multiple myeloma oncogene 1
bcl-2protein Cytokeratin 20 Myosin, smooth muscle heavy chain
bcl-6protein Cytokeratin, high molecular weight Napsin A
Calretinin Cytokeratin, low molecular weight Neurofilament protein
Cancer antigen 125 Cytokeratin, pan- Octamer transcription factor-3/4
Carcinoembryonic antigen Desmin p16ink4a
CD3 Detected on GIST-1 p40
CD4 E-cadherin p53
CD5 Epithelial cell adhesion molecule p57
CD8 Epithelial membrane antigen p63
CD10 Estrogen receptor alpha Paired box gene-2 protein
CD14 Factor VIII related antigen Paired box gene-8 protein
CD15 GATA3 Placental alkaline phosphatase
CD19 Glial fibrillary acidic protein PMS2
CD20 Glypican 3 Podoplanin
CD23 Gross cystic disease fluid protein-15 Prostate specific acid phosphatase
CD30 HER-2 Prostate specific antigen
CD31 Hepatocyte antigen Prostein
CD34 Human chorionic gonadotropin Progesterone receptor
CD45 Immunoglobulin kappa S-100 protein beta
CD56 Immunoglobulin lambda Sal-like protein 4
CD68 Immunoglobubin M SOX10
CD79a Ki-67 Synaptophysin
CD99 Mammaglobin Terminal deoxynucl. transferase
CD117 Melan-A Vimentin
Chromogranin Melanosoma specific antigen Wilm's tumour-1 protein
~100 IHCmarkers
in NordiQC
RunsTested 1-15 times
20
WW
W.N
ORDIQ
C.ORG
Participant site
Multi-tissue FFPE blocks10% NBF 24-48 h (ASCO/CAP guidelines …)• Normal and clinically relevant tumour tissues • Different levels of antigen expression
• high, moderate, low, none
Test material
2 unstained slides for each marker send to the participants1 stained slide returned for central assessment
Open website
24
PDF file e-mailed to the individual participants with assessment marks, and – if suboptimal –explanations and recommendations
Nordic Immunohistochemical Quality Control
Assessing the immunohistochemical assay quality Based on “standard” processed circulated tissues
Identifying optimal and insufficient results Correlated to antibodies, protocols and stainer platforms
Publishing general results Website: www.nordiqc.org Scientific journals
Giving directions for improvement Individually tailored recommendations
26
Selected NordiQC publications
27
Selected publications
AIMM 2015, 23:1
AIMM 2014, 22:241
AIMM 2016-17
NordiQC
Score Criteria: Staining reaction considered …Optimal … Perfect or close to perfect in all of the included
tissue cores
Good … Fully acceptable in all of the included tissue cores. However, the protocol may be optimized to ensure the best staining intensity and signal-to-noise ratio
Borderline … Insufficient because of, e.g., a generally too weak staining or a false negative staining of one of the included tissues, or a minor false positive staining reaction
Poor … Very insufficient because of, e.g., false negative staining of several of the included tissues, or a major false positive staining reaction
35%
33%
21%11%
OptimalGoodBorderlinePoor
NordiQC assessment results 2003 – 2014
General module ~ 20,000 slides ( ~100.000 core sections)
Insufficient 32%
58%21%
9% 12%
OptimalGoodBorderlinePoor
NordiQC assessment results 2003 – 2014
Breast cancer module ~ 9,000 slides (~35,000 core sections)
Insufficient 21%
33
Major causes of insufficient stains in ~ 9,000 slides
Less successful antibodies (17%)
poor antibodies, less robust antibodies, poorly calibrated RTUs
stainer platform dependent antibodies
Insufficiently calibrated antibody dilutions (20%)
Insufficient or erroneous epitope retrieval (27%)
Error-prone or less sensitive visualization systems (19%)
Other (17%)heat induced or proteolysis induced impaired morphology
drying out phenomena
stainer platform dependant protocol issues
excessive counterstaining impairing interpretation
NordiQC general results 2003 – 2014
Protocol recommendations
Typical protocol providing an optimal result
35
352 labs advised in 6 challenges with repeated tests
(CGA, Calr, CD5, CD15, CD23, CK-LMW)
No. Improved %
Positive 227 167 74
Negative 125 22 18
Results of NordiQC recommendations
NordiQC EQA: Estrogen Receptor 2003-11
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
8 10 13 B1 B3 B5 B7 B8 B10 B11 B13 B15 B17PASS RATE (%)
45%
87%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
8 10 13 B1 B3 B5 B7 B8 B10 B11 B13 B15 B17PASS RATE (%)
70
281122
141197
Number of participants
NordiQC EQA: Estrogen Receptor 2003-11
Estrogen receptorPass rate (optimal + good) by participant status
New participants ’Old’ participants
Run 10, 2004 57% 71%
Run B15, 2010 70% 86%
Run B19, 2015 51% 73%
Average 59% 77%
NordiQC EQA: Estrogen Receptor
Estrogen receptorChanges in protocol standardization 2003 - 2013
2003B8
2013B15
Titre range / average 1:10-1.000 / 1:125 1:10-400 / 1:90
HIER buffer by vendor 6% 88%
HIER by high pH 70% 94%
Polymer/multimer kit 56% 93%
Fully automated system 6% 59%
NordiQC EQA: Estrogen Receptor
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
Estrogen receptorAntibody clone selection
SP1
EP16F111D5
NordiQC EQA: Estrogen Receptor
• Appropriate technical quality• Signal-to-noise, morphology etc.
• Appropriate analytical sensitivity and specificity:• Concordance with reference
NordiQC EQA: Estrogen Receptor
• Appropriate technical quality• Signal-to-noise, morphology etc.
• Appropriate analytical sensitivity and specificity:• Concordance with reference
NordiQC EQA: Estrogen Receptor
Uterine cervix
Breast carc. high Breast carc. low Breast carc. neg.
Tonsil
NordiQC EQA: Estrogen Receptor
EQA of breast markers - run B19: HER2
• Appropriate technical quality• Signal-to-noise, morphology etc.
• Appropriate analytical sensitivity and specificity:• Concordance with reference
46
46
NordiQC runs for HER2 IHCCK7
Ampl. 3+ Ampl. 2+ Unampl. 2+ Unampl. 0
Optim
al
Ampl. 3+ Ampl. 1+ Unampl. 1+ Unampl. 0
Poor
47
47
NordiQC runs for HER2 IHCCK7
Ampl. 3+ Ampl. 2+ Unampl. 2+ Unampl. 0
Optim
al
Ampl. 3+ Ampl. 2+ Unampl. 3+ Unampl. 1
Poor
14%insuff.
HER-2 staining results in 17 runs
HER-2 staining: Approved vs. lab developed IVD
Approved IVD (n=1145)
Lab devel. IVD(n=558)
FN FP FN FP
NordiQCB6-B14
127 (11%)
0 141 (25%)
28(5%)
NordiQC -Roche
Collaboration
Roche – NordiQC joint venture
”Normalized” to the American breast cancer population: ~ 300 patients per year with approved IVD~ 700 patients per year with lab developed tests
Roche – NordiQC joint venture
”Normalized” to the American breast cancer population
HER-2 staining: Approved vs. lab developed IVD
Every $1 saved by laboratoriesusing cheaper reagents potentially results in ~ $6 additional costs to the health care system
54
Major causes of insufficient stains in ~ 9,000 slides
Less successful antibodies (17%)
poor antibodies, less robust antibodies, poorly calibrated RTUs
stainer platform dependent antibodies
Insufficiently calibrated antibody dilutions (20%)
Insufficient or erroneous epitope retrieval (27%)
Error-prone or less sensitive visualization systems (19%)
Other (17%)heat induced or proteolysis induced impaired morphology
drying out phenomena
stainer platform dependant protocol issues
excessive counterstaining impairing interpretation
NordiQC general results 2003 – 2014
55
Poor antibodies (few examples)
Antigen Clone High expressor
Low expressor
Non expressor
CD5 CD5/54/F6 √ FN –CD23 MHM6 √ FN –CD31 1A10 (√) FN –CD31 SP38 (√) FN –CD138 5F7 (√) FN –CDX2 SP54 (√) FN FPCDX2 CDX2-88 √ FN FPCEA TF-3H8-1 √ √ FPCGA DAK. A3 √ FN –CK20 PW31 √ (√) –PR SP2 √ √ FPSYP SY38 √ FN –
56
Poor antibodies: CD5
CD5 N Sufficient* Optimal*4C7 conc 145 74% 49%SP19 conc 11 91% 46%CD5/54/F6 conc 28 4% 0%
* With optimal protocol settings
57
Poor antibodies: CD5
SP19 + optimal protocol CD5/54/F6
TonsilB-C
LL
TP FN
FNTP
Optimal (16%)
Poor antibodies: CD31
JC70A 1A10
Optimal (16%)
Poor antibodies: CD31
JC70A 1A10
Haemangiosarcoma
Poor antibodies – MLH1
MLH1 clone ES05 MLH1 clone EPR3894
61
Major causes of insufficient stains in ~ 9,000 slides
Less successful antibodies (17%)
poor antibodies, less robust antibodies, poorly calibrated RTUs
stainer platform dependent antibodies
Insufficiently calibrated antibody dilutions (20%)
Insufficient or erroneous epitope retrieval (27%)
Error-prone or less sensitive visualization systems (19%)
Other (17%)heat induced or proteolysis induced impaired morphology
drying out phenomena
stainer platform dependant protocol issues
excessive counterstaining impairing interpretation
NordiQC general results 2003 – 2014
CD5 Run 24 N Sufficient* Optimal*SP19 conc 11 91% 46%SP19 RTU Dako 3 100% 100%SP19 RTU VMS 14 79% 14%
Poor RTU formats: CD5
* With optimal protocol settings
FN
CD5 Run 34 N Sufficient* Optimal*SP19 RTU VMS 33 97% 97%
Poor RTU formats: CGA
LK2H10 REF pAb RTU Comp.1
mAb LK2H10 RTU Comp.3mAb LK2H10 RTU Comp.2
Medullary carcinoma
Poor RTU formats: CGA
Small cell carcinoma
LK2H10 REF pAb RTU Comp.1
mAb LK2H10 RTU Comp.3mAb LK2H10 RTU Comp.2
High Expressors
Low Expressor
Non-expressor
Optimal Insufficient
Chromogranin A
Critical Assay Performance Control: Peripheral nerves
Poor RTU formats: CGA
66
Major causes of insufficient stains in ~ 9,000 slides
Less successful antibodies (17%)
poor antibodies, less robust antibodies, poorly calibrated RTUs
stainer platform dependent antibodies
Insufficiently calibrated antibody dilutions (20%)
Insufficient or erroneous epitope retrieval (27%)
Error-prone or less sensitive visualization systems (19%)
Other (17%)heat induced or proteolysis induced impaired morphology
drying out phenomena
stainer platform dependant protocol issues
excessive counterstaining impairing interpretation
NordiQC general results 2003 – 2014
67
Platform dependent antibodies
Antigen Clone XT / Ultraautomated
Bond-maxautomated
Autostainersemiautomated
CD4 1F6 FN Weak √
SP35 √ √ √CD56 123C3 FN Weak √
MRQ-42 √ ? √CD79a JCB117 Weak √ √
SP18 √ √ √BSAP/Pax5 24 FN Weak √
SP34 √ √ √BCL6 PG-B6p FN Weak √
GI191E/A8 √ √ √SYP 27G12 Weak √ √
MRQ-40 √ √ √
Hodgkin lymphoma NS
clone SP34RTU VMS/CM
clone 24RTU VMS/CM
Platform dependent antibodies: PAX5
x200 x200
69
Major causes of insufficient stains in ~ 9,000 slides
Less successful antibodies (17%)
poor antibodies, less robust antibodies, poorly calibrated RTUs
stainer platform dependent antibodies
Insufficiently calibrated antibody dilutions (20%)
Insufficient or erroneous epitope retrieval (27%)
Error-prone or less sensitive visualization systems (19%)
Other (17%)heat induced or proteolysis induced impaired morphology
drying out phenomena
stainer platform dependant protocol issues
excessive counterstaining impairing interpretation
NordiQC general results 2003 – 2014
70
Inappropriate antibody dilution – CD79a
JCB117 appropriate JCB117 too dilute
Plasmacytom
a
Inappropriate antibody dilution – Ig light chains
~1:300 ~1:3.000 ~1:30.000
IgK: Dako pAb A0191
Inappropriate antibody dilution – Ig light chains
239 IgK tests, 12 Abs: 12% optimalDako pAb A0191: 17% optimal+TRS/Ci 3.000-16.000: 29 % optimal
All other Abs: 0% optimal
Alternative: FLOW cytometry
73
Major causes of insufficient stains in ~ 9,000 slides
Less successful antibodies (17%)
poor antibodies, less robust antibodies, poorly calibrated RTUs
stainer platform dependent antibodies
Insufficiently calibrated antibody dilutions (20%)
Insufficient or erroneous epitope retrieval (27%)
Error-prone or less sensitive visualization systems (19%)
Other (17%)heat induced or proteolysis induced impaired morphology
drying out phenomena
stainer platform dependant protocol issues
excessive counterstaining impairing interpretation
NordiQC general results 2003 – 2014
74
Inappropriate retrieval
AE1/AE3 + HIER AE1/AE3 + proteolysis
LiverR
CC
FNTP
FNTP
75
Misleading datasheets
Giving false negative results when only LMW-CKs are present
Misleading datasheets
77
IHC - NordiQC 2014
AE1/AE3 : Optimal results only obtained by HIER in NordiQC runs
Dako: RTU – HIER Conc: Proteolysis or HIERLeica: RTU – Proteolysis Conc: HIERThermo: Conc: HIER Quanto – Proteolysis UltraVision…………AE1/AE3/PCK26: Optimal results mainly obtained by HIER+protelysis in NordiQC runs
VMS: RTU - Proteolysis
Misleading data sheets + Wrong control material used
By 17th October 2014
Improved datasheets
NordiQC run 41 2014 – ECAD 271 labs
False positive: EP700Y
Fra: Galloway, Mary [mailto:Mary.Galloway@fda.hhs.gov] Sendt: 13. november 2014 01:14Til: Søren Nielsen / Region NordjyllandEmne: RE: Changes Made to Package Inserts
Sören,Thanks for identifying and alerting us to the issues with anti-E-cadherin (36) and anti-Pan Keratin. The package inserts are now changed (see links below).I hope we can continue to learn of any future staining problems you may uncover.Much appreciated!Mary
RCC
FNTP
Misleading datasheets
Giving false negative results in low expressing cells and tumours
81
Major causes of insufficient stains in ~ 9,000 slides
Less successful antibodies (17%)
poor antibodies, less robust antibodies, poorly calibrated RTUs
stainer platform dependent antibodies
Insufficiently calibrated antibody dilutions (20%)
Insufficient or erroneous epitope retrieval (27%)
Error-prone or less sensitive visualization systems (19%)
Other (17%)heat induced or proteolysis induced impaired morphology
drying out phenomena
stainer platform dependant protocol issues
excessive counterstaining impairing interpretation
NordiQC general results 2003 – 2014
NordiQC run 41/42 2014 - MMR
MMR MLH1 mAb clone ES05, 1:20 LeicaUltraView + Amplification OptiView + Amplification (Tyr.)
1’ generation 3-step multimer, VMS 2’ generation 3-step multimer, VMS
NordiQC run 41 2014 – PMS2 131 labs
NO
mutation
Optimal: 47% Insufficient: 15%
NordiQC run 41 2014 – PMS2 131 labs
Mutation
Optimal: 47% Insufficient: 15%
NordiQC run 41 2014 – PMS2 131 labs
Mutation
Optimal: 47% Insufficient: 15%
•Too dilute Ab•Insufficient HIER•Insensitive viz system
PD-L1
>10%
Companion
PD-L1
Tonsil
NSCLCTPS >50%Immuno-therapy: 1. line
NSCLCTPS 1%?Immuno-therapy2. lineor none
22C3 RTU 22C3 LDT
88
Tailored recommendations
Replace less successful antibodies (conc./RTU)
Calibrate the antibody concentration
Use HIER (instead of proteolysis or no retrieval)
Increase HIER time / temperature / buffer pH For 95% of epitopes pH 8-9 is preferable to pH 6
Use a non-biotin based viz. system
Use FDA approved kits instead of home-brews
. . . . .
Improve the internal QC: Identify the right controls Select well defined low expressor cells/tissues
89
External Quality Assurance (EQA)
Provides objective evidence of lab performance
Identifies methodological errors
Provides directions for improvements & controls
The results of the NordiQC work indicate that
Improvement of IHC is strongly needed
EQA schemes, industry and KOL must align - describing the requirements for optimal IHC performance.
Conclusion
90
Collaboration between Companies and EQA schemes
• Define expression patterns for markers
• Identify best controls and CSQIs
• Implement these in guide lines and package inserts
Companies
• Discontinue poor antibodies
• Guide laboratories
• platform dependent clones
• Amend inappropriate package inserts.
Conclusion
Almost 1/3 of all IHC stains produced by NordiQC participants are still insufficient ! New labs New antibodies, techniques, platforms Increasing demands
How many IHC stains produced by labs not participating in an EQA scheme are insufficient ?How many scientific publications are based oninsufficient IHC stains ?What are the consequences for the patients ?
Perspective