Currently used laboratory methodologies for assays detecting pd‐1, pd‐l1, pd‐l2 and soluble pd‐l1 in patients with metastatic breast cancer

Abstract

Approximately 20% of breast cancer (BC) patients suffer from distant metastasis. The incidence and prevalence rates of metastatic BC have increased annually. Immune checkpoint inhib-itors are an emerging area of treatment, especially for metastatic patients with poor outcomes. Sev-eral antibody drugs have been developed and approved for companion testing of the programmed death protine‐1 (PD‐1) axis. We reviewed currently used laboratory methodologies for assays de-termining PD‐1 axis to provide a comprehensive understanding of principles, advantages, and drawbacks involved in their implementation. The most commonly used method is immunohisto-chemistry (92.9%) for PD‐L1 expression using tissue samples (96.4%). The commonly used anti‐PD‐ L1 antibody clone were commercially available 22C3 (30.8%), SP142 (19.2%), SP263 (15.4%), and E1L3N (11.5%). Enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay and electrochemiluminescent immunoassay that target soluble PD‐ligand (L)1 were developed and popularized in 2019–2021, in contrast to 2016–2018. Easy accessibility and non‐invasiveness due to the use of blood samples, quantitative outputs, and relatively rapid turnaround times make them more preferable. Regarding scoring methods, a combination of tumor and immune cells (45.5% in 2016–2018 to 57.1% in 2019–2021) rather than each cell alone became more popular. Information about antibody clones, platforms, scoring methods, and related companion drugs is recommended for reporting PD‐L1 expression.