No abstract

Interest in biomarkers in the field of thoracic oncology is focused on the search for new robust tests for diagnosis (in particular for screening), prognosis and theragnosis. These biomarkers can be detected in tissues and/or cells, but also in biological fluids, mainly the blood. In this context, there is growing interest in the detection of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in the blood of lung cancer patients since CTC identification, enumeration and characterization may have a direct impact on diagnosis, prognosis and theragnosis in the daily clinical practice. Many direct and indirect methods have been developed to detect and characterize CTCs in lung cancer patients. However, these different approaches still hold limitations and many of them have demonstrated unequal sensitivity and specificity. Indeed, these methods hold advantages but also certain disadvantages. Therefore, despite the promises, it is currently difficult and premature to apply this methodology to the routine care of lung cancer patients. This situation is the consequence of the analysis of the methodological approaches for the detection and characterization of CTCs and of the results published to date. Finally, the advent of targeted cancer therapies in thoracic oncology has stimulated considerable interest in non-invasive detection of genomic alterations in tumors over time through the analysis of CTCs, an approach that may help clinicians to optimize therapeutic strategies for lung cancer patients. We describe here the main methods for CTC detection, the advantages and limitations of these different approaches and the potential usefulness and value of CTC characterization in the field of thoracic oncology.

Treatment with EGFR inhibitors is limited to patients with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer who have known EGFR mutations. Currently, patient care has to respond to several imperatives to make these inhibitors broadly available to all patients; fast and accurate detection of EGFR mutations by a sensitive and specific standardized cost-effective method, easy-to-implement in settings with limited expertise in molecular diagnostics.We evaluated the Idylla™ EGFR Mutation Assay (Biocartis) for the detection of EGFR mutations in archived formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor samples from a series of 55 patients with lung adenocarcinoma and compared these results with those obtained by a pyrosequencing ISO-15189 accredited laboratory method. The comparison was made on both whole surgical tumor sections and on three artificially constructed small biopsies (∼1 mm) from the same FFPE blocks. Cost-effectiveness and turnaround time comparison between the two methods was performed.On both whole tissue sections and on biopsy cores, the Idylla™ and pyrosequencing had an agreement of 95% (52/55). The Idylla™ EGFR Assay produced results faster and more cost-effective than pyrosequencing.The Idylla™ system showed a good sensitivity and was cost-saving in our setting. Because of the easy workflow, the Idylla™ system has the potential to expand EGFR testing to more pathology laboratories in a reliable and fast manner.

This study showed that VE1 IHC should be a substitute for molecular biology in the initial assessment of the BRAFV600E status in MPP. This methodology needs to be set up in pathology laboratories in accordance with quality control/quality assurance accreditation procedures. Under these strict conditions the question is to know if BRAFV600E-IHC can serve not only as a prescreening tool, but also as a stand-alone test (at least in cases displaying an unequivocally staining pattern) as well as an alternative predictive test for samples for which the molecular biology failed.

The aim of accreditation of a pathology laboratory is to control and optimize, in a permanent manner, good professional practice in clinical and molecular pathology, as defined by internationally established standards. Accreditation of a pathology laboratory is a key element in fine in increasing recognition of the quality of the analyses performed by a laboratory and in improving the care it provides to patients. One of the accreditation standards applied to clinical chemistry and pathology laboratories in the European Union is the ISO 15189 norm. Continued functioning of a pathology laboratory might in time be determined by whether or not it has succeeded the accreditation process. Necessary requirements for accreditation, according to the ISO 15189 norm, include an operational quality management system and continuous control of the methods used for diagnostic purposes. Given these goals, one would expect that all pathologists would agree on the positive effects of accreditation. Yet, some of the requirements stipulated in the accreditation standards, coming from the bodies that accredit pathology laboratories, and certain normative issues are perceived as arduous and sometimes not adapted to or even useless in daily pathology practice. The aim of this review is to elaborate why it is necessary to obtain accreditation but also why certain requirements for accreditation might be experienced as inappropriate.