Whole tumor section quantitative image analysis maximizes between-pathologists' reproducibility for clinical immunohistochemistry-based biomarkers

Abstract

Pathologists have had increasing responsibility for quantitating immunohistochemistry (IHC) biomarkers with the expectation of high between-reader reproducibility due to clinical decision-making especially for patient therapy. Digital imaging-based quantitation of IHC clinical slides offers a potential aid for improvement; however, its clinical adoption is limited potentially due to a conventional field-of-view annotation approach. In this study, we implemented a novel solely morphology-based whole tumor section annotation strategy to maximize image analysis quantitation results between readers. We first compare the field-of-view image analysis annotation approach to digital and manual-based modalities across multiple clinical studies (~120 cases per study) and biomarkers (ER, PR, HER2, Ki-67, and p53 IHC) and then compare a subset of the same cases (~40 cases each from the ER, PR, HER2, and Ki-67 studies) using whole tumor section annotation approach to understand incremental value of all modalities. Between-reader results for each biomarker in relation to conventional scoring modalities showed similar concordance as manual read: ER field-of-view image analysis: 95.3% (95% CI 92.0-98.2%) vs digital read: 92.0% (87.8-95.8%) vs manual read: 94.9% (91.4-97.8%); PR field-of-view image analysis: 94.1% (90.3-97.2%) vs digital read: 94.0% (90.2-97.1%) vs manual read: 94.4% (90.9-97.2%); Ki-67 field-of-view image analysis: 86.8% (82.1-91.4%) vs digital read: 76.6% (70.9-82.2%) vs manual read: 85.6% (80.4-90.4%); p53 field-of-view image analysis: 81.7% (76.4-86.8%) vs digital read: 80.6% (75.0-86.0%) vs manual read: 78.8% (72.2-83.3%); and HER2 field-of-view image analysis: 93.8% (90.0-97.2%) vs digital read: 91.0 (86.6-94.9%) vs manual read: 87.2% (82.1-91.9%). Subset implementation and analysis on the same cases using whole tumor section image analysis approach showed significant improvement between pathologists over field-of-view image analysis and manual read (HER2 100% (97-100%), P=0.013 field-of-view image analysis and 0.013 manual read; Ki-67 100% (96.9-100%), P=0.040 and 0.012; ER 98.3% (94.1-99.5%), p=0.232 and 0.181; and PR 96.6% (91.5-98.7%), p=0.012 and 0.257). Overall, whole tumor section image analysis significantly improves between-pathologist's reproducibility and is the optimal approach for clinical-based image analysis algorithms.

Intertumoral Heterogeneity of CD3+ and CD8+ T-Cell Densities in the Microenvironment of DNA Mismatch-Repair–Deficient Colon Cancers: Implications for Prognosis

“…Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained sections along with the immunostained slides were scanned on VENTANA iSCAN HT scanner (Figure 1). Three independent pathologists manually annotated H&E sections to outline the entire tumor region containing invasive cancer ( i.e., core of the tumor [CT]) using a whole tumor section approach (31). They further demarcated the invasive margin (IM) without knowledge of clinical characteristics or outcome by indicating sections of the tumor outline involved in the invasive process.…”

Digital Slide Assessment for Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Combined Positive Score in Head and Neck Squamous Carcinoma: Focus on Validation and Vision

“…To address need to work from home during the COVID-19 pandemic, in March 2020 the College of American Pathologists (CAP) issued "COVID-19 Remote Sign-Out Guidance" that stated pathologists "may use a non-FDA approved system as long as it has been properly validated" for primary diagnosis (Borowsky et al, 2020). This statement also has implications for remote biomarker assessment, because although several digital tools were being used for this purpose (Barnes et al, 2017;Pantanowitz et al, 2020) experience with this technology was still limited.…”

Multiplexed Immunohistochemistry for Molecular and Immune Profiling in Lung Cancer—Just About Ready for Prime-Time?

“…As tumors frequently harbor significant cellular and spatial heterogeneity (e.g., stroma, tumor-stroma interface, intratumoral), in particular for immune markers such as PD-L1 or CD8 infiltrates [95], it is essential to perform high-resolution multiplexed analysis across whole tumor sections. It has been demonstrate that the analysis of small ROIs generates significant variation and errors in the assessment of tumor and immune markers in cancer [96,97]. Hence, there is a need for integrated mIHC systems enabling high-degree of multiplexing coupled with digital analysis for high-resolution analyses on whole tumor slides [98].…”