This review provides an update on the current role of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) and mediastinoscopy (Med) in assessment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Invasive mediastinal lymph node (LN) staging is the major application for both of these techniques. Up until recently, Med was the gold standard for invasive mediastinal LN staging in NSCLC. However, EBUS-TBNA has shown to be equivalent, and in some studies better than Med for invasive staging of lung cancer. EBUS-TBNA offers access to N1 LNs and development of the thin convex probe EBUS (TCP-EBUS) will expand EBUS-TBNA access from the paratracheal region and central airways to more distal parabronchial regions allowing for more extensive N1 LN assessment and sampling more distal lung tumors. EBUS-TBNA is more cost-effective than Med and it is currently recommended as the test of first choice for invasive mediastinal LN staging in lung cancer. ConfirmatoryMed should be performed selectively in patients with high pretest probability of metastatic disease. Addition of esophageal ultrasound fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) may increase diagnostic yield of EBUS-TBNA mediastinal staging. Both Med and EBUS-TBNA can be used in primary lung cancer diagnosis, restaging of the mediastinum following neoadjuvant therapy and in diagnosis of lung cancer recurrence. In the future, a combination of EBUS-TBNA with or without EUS-FNA and Med is most likely going to provide the most optimal invasive assessment of the mediastinum in patients with lung cancer. The decision on test choice and sequence should be made on a case-by-case basis and factoring in local resources and expertise.

Invasive mediastinal staging in NSCLC is unlikely to be cost-effective in clinical N0 patients if pN2 <2.5%. In patients with probability of mediastinal metastasis between 2.5% and 57% EBUS-TBNA is cost-effective as the only staging modality. Confirmatory mediastinoscopy should be considered in high-risk patients (pN2 > 57%) in case of negative EBUS-TBNA.

Background: Programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) is used as biomarker for pembrolizumab therapy in advanced stage lung cancer patients. However, data permitting direct performance comparison between cytology and surgical specimen types are limited since both specimens from a single tumor site are infrequently available. In addition, alcohol fixation used with cytology specimens requires technical validation of the PD-L1 IHC assay before clinical use. We here report our experience with implementation of the PD-L1 22C3 IHC pharmDxTM assay for cytologic samples at a large tertiary cancer center. Study Design: Archival formalin-fixed (FF), paraffin-embedded cell blocks (CBs) and subsequent lung tumor resections (LTRs) from the same anatomical site were used for a direct comparison of PD-L1 tumor proportion scores (TPSs). TPS values were independently determined by one surgical lung pathologist and two cytopathologists blinded to the specimen pairs. An interim analysis was performed to facilitate the pooling of expertise among observers. After PD-L1 22C3 IHC pharmDxTM implementation for FF cytology specimens, dual-processed samples were used for a prospective technical validation of CytoLyt® prefixation (CF). Digital image analysis was performed for a subset of dual-processed specimens. Results: Eighty-one CBs and LTRs were included for comparison of the specimen types. PD-L1 assessment in CBs had an accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 88.9/72.8, 66.7/73.5, 95.2/72.3, 80.0/65.8, and 90.9/79.1% for the ≥50/≥1% cutoff, respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76, 0.90), and it improved after interim analysis (before: 0.79 and after: 0.92). The overall concordance between CF and FF for the categories defined by the ≥50/≥1% cutoff values was 90.4% (95% CI: 79.0, 96.8). Similar assay performance was confirmed by digital analysis. Conclusions: PD-L1 22C3 IHC pharmDxTM shows good reliability if used with CB preparations. CF does not impact assay results significantly. Clinical validation with outcome data is needed, and digital methods of assessment should be further investigated.

No abstract

No abstract