ROS1 Immunohistochemistry Research Articles

Additional reporting of diffuse and homogeneous ROS-1 SP384 immunoreactivity enhances prediction of ROS1 fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer.

ROS-1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a common method for screening ROS1 fusion in the clinical management of non-small cell lung cancer. The interpretation criteria for ROS-1 SP384 IHC, however, remain unestablished. Sixty-five non-small cell lung cancer cases underwent AmoyDx ROS1 fusion real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) study and ROS-1 SP384 IHC tests, which were retrieved for analysis. ROS-1 IHC tests were interpreted based on the established classifiers as well as the presence of diffuse homogeneous immunoreactivity. The diagnostic accuracies of these ROS-1 IHC interpretation methods were evaluated by comparing them with the ROS1 real-time PCR results. Previous ROS-1 IHC classifiers demonstrated high sensitivity for positive ROS1 real-time PCR results (100%), but they showed low specificities (25%-50%) and overall accuracies (58%-72%). In contrast, the diffuse homogeneous ROS-1 immunoreactivity predicted positive ROS1 real-time PCR results with much higher specificity (94%) and overall accuracy (95%), albeit with a slightly lower sensitivity (97%). Some cases that showed discrepancy between diffuse homogeneous ROS-1 immunoreactivity and real-time PCR results involved rare ROS1::LDLR fusion and suboptimal IHC staining. A 3-tier reporting system for ROS-1 SP384 IHC testing combining previous interpretation criteria and diffuse and homogeneous immunoreactivity may better predict ROS1 fusion status without decreasing specificity.

ROS1 fusions in resected stage I-III adenocarcinoma: Results from the European Thoracic Oncology Platform Lungscape project

BackgroundROS1 fusion is a relatively low prevalence (0.6–2.0%) but targetable driver in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). Robust and low-cost tests, such as immunohistochemistry (IHC), are desirable to screen for patients potentially harboring this fusion. The aim was to investigate the prevalence of ROS1 fusions in a clinically annotated European stage I-III LUAD cohort using IHC screening with the in vitro diagnostics (IVD)-marked clone SP384, followed by confirmatory molecular analysis in pre-defined subsets. MethodsResected LUADs constructed in tissue microarrays, were immunostained for ROS1 expression using SP384 clone in a ready-to-use kit and Ventana immunostainers. After external quality control, analysis was performed by trained pathologists. Staining intensity of at least 2+ (any percentage of tumor cells) was considered IHC positive (ROS1 IHC + ). Subsequently, ROS1 IHC + cases were 1:1:1 matched with IHC0 and IHC1 + cases and subjected to orthogonal ROS1 FISH and RNA-based testing. ResultsThe prevalence of positive ROS1 expression (ROS1 IHC + ), defined as IHC 2+/3+, was 4 % (35 of 866 LUADs). Twenty-eight ROS1 IHC + cases were analyzed by FISH/RNA-based testing, with only two harboring a confirmed ROS1 gene fusion, corresponding to a lower limit for the prevalence of ROS1 gene fusion of 0.23 %. They represent a 7 % probability of identifying a fusion among ROS1 IHC + cases. Both confirmed cases were among the only four with sufficient material and H-score ≥ 200, leading to a 50 % probability of identifying a ROS1 gene fusion in cases with an H-score considered strongly positive. All matched ROS1 IHC- (IHC0 and IHC1 + ) cases were also found negative by FISH/RNA-based testing, leading to a 100 % probability of lack of ROS1 fusion for ROS1 IHC- cases. ConclusionsThe prevalence of ROS1 fusion in an LUAD stage I-III European cohort was relatively low. ROS1 IHC using SP384 clone is useful for exclusion of ROS1 gene fusion negative cases.

Importance of Testing for ROS1 Rearrangements in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the Era of Targeted Therapy in a Latin American Country.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. However, with the optimization of screening strategies and advances in treatment, mortality has been decreasing in recent years. In this study, we describe non-small cell lung cancer patients diagnosed between 2021 and 2022 at a high-complexity hospital in Latin America, as well as the immunohistochemistry techniques used to screen for ROS1 rearrangements, in the context of the recent approval of crizotinib for the treatment of ROS1 rearrangements in non-small cell lung cancer in Colombia. A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted. Sociodemographic, clinical, and molecular pathology information from non-small cell lung cancer individuals who underwent immunohistochemistry to detect ROS1 rearrangements between 2021 and 2022 at Fundación Valle del Lili (Cali, Colombia) was recorded. The clinical outcomes of confirmed ROS1 rearrangements in non-small cell lung cancer patients were reported. One hundred and thirty-six patients with non-small cell lung cancer were included. The median age at diagnosis was 69.8 years (interquartile range 61.9-77.7). At diagnosis, 69.8% (n = 95) were at stage IV. ROS1 immunohistochemistry was performed using the monoclonal D4D6 antibody clone in 54.4% (n = 74) of the cases, while 45.6% (n = 62) were done with the monoclonal SP384 antibody clone. Two patients were confirmed to have ROS1 rearrangements in non-small cell lung cancer using next-generation sequencing and received crizotinib. On follow-up at months 5.3 and 7.0, one patient had a partial response, and the other had oligo-progression, respectively. Screening for ROS1 rearrangements in non-small cell lung cancer is imperative, as multiple prospective studies have shown improved clinical outcomes with tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Given the recent approval of crizotinib in Colombia, public health policies must be oriented toward early detection of driver mutations and prompt treatment. Additionally, future approvals of newly tested tyrosine kinase inhibitors should be anticipated.

CD74/SLC34A2-ROS1 Fusion Variants Involving the Transmembrane Region Predict Poor Response to Crizotinib in NSCLC Independent of TP53 Mutations

IntroductionVariable partners and breakpoints have been reported in patients with ROS1-rearranged NSCLC. Here, we investigated the association of fusion partners and breakpoints with crizotinib efficacy in NSCLCs with common ROS1 fusions. MethodsDNA and RNA next-generation sequencing (NGS) and immunohistochemistry were performed to characterize ROS1 fusions. ResultsUsing DNA NGS, we identified ROS1 fusions in 210 cases, comprising 171 common (CD74/EZR/TPM3/SDC4/SLC34A2-ROS1) and 39 uncommon (variants identified in <5%) ROS1 fusion cases. DNA NGS detected variable ROS1 genomic breakpoints in common ROS1 fusions, whereas RNA NGS found ROS1 breakpoints mainly occurring in exons 32, 34 and 35, resulting in long (exon 32) and short (exon 34 or 35) ROS1 fusions. ROS1 immunohistochemistry revealed that membranous and cytoplasmic staining was predominant in long ROS1 fusions, whereas cytoplasmic staining was predominant in short ROS1 fusions (p = 0.006). For patients who received first-line crizotinib, median progression-free survival (mPFS) was lower in patients with long ROS1 fusions than those with short ROS1 fusions (8.0 versus 24.0 mo, p = 0.006). Moreover, mPFS for patients with and without TP53 mutations was 8.0 and 19.0 months, respectively (p = 0.159); mPFS for patients with and without BIM deletion polymorphism was 5.0 and 22.0 months, respectively (p = 0.003). When analyzing together with fusion partners, patients with long CD74/SLC34A2-ROS1 fusions were found to have shorter PFS than those with other ROS1, regardless of the presence or absence of TP53 mutations (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002, respectively). ConclusionsLong CD74/SLC34A2-ROS1 fusions, which retain transmembrane regions in ROS1 and fusion partners, are associated with poor response to crizotinib independent of TP53 mutations.

Adequacy of cytology and small biopsy samples obtained with rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE) for predictive biomarker testing in non-small cell lung cancer

Complete biomarker workup of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) specimens is essential for appropriate and timely clinical management decisions. This can be challenging to achieve from small cytology and histology specimens, with increasing numbers of molecular and immunohistochemical biomarkers required. We conducted a 5 year retrospective audit of cases at our institution to assess the diagnostic and biomarker testing adequacy rates, particularly those specimens obtained with rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE), performed by a cytopathologist and a cytology scientist or pathology trainee, including all endobronchial ultrasound guided transbronchial needle aspirations (EBUS-TBNA), CT guided lung fine needle aspirations (FNA) and CT guided lung core biopsies. A total of 5,354 cases were identified, of which 92.2% had sufficient material for diagnosis. Of the 1506 cases identified with a recorded diagnosis of lung adenocarcinoma or NSCLC, not otherwise specified, 1001 (66.5%) had biomarker testing requested. Sufficient material was available in 89.5% of cases for a complete biomarker workup which included EGFR and KRAS mutational testing (all cases), ALK, ROS1 and PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (all cases), and ALK and ROS1 FISH (as required). For EGFR and KRAS mutational testing across both cytology and histology specimens, 99% of cases were sufficient. Of the samples in which a complete biomarker workup was unable to be performed, approximately half were only insufficient due to inadequate numbers of tumour cells for PD-L1 immunohistochemistry. Excluding PD-L1 IHC, 952 (95.1%) of samples obtained with ROSE were sufficient for the remainder of the testing requirements. Next generation sequencing using a 33 gene custom AmpliSeq panel was achieved in up to 72% of cases. In conclusion, small cytology and histology specimens obtained with ROSE are suitable for predictive biomarker testing in NSCLC, although attention needs to be paid to obtaining sufficient cells (>100) for PD-L1 immunohistochemistry.

Comparison of Different ROS1 Immunohistochemistry Clones and Consistency with Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Results in Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma

The study of ROS1 rearrangement in non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) has gained importance as it enables personalized treatment of NSCLC with tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Therefore, it is important that the ROS1 assessment tests become more standardized. In this study, we compared the two immunohistochemistry (IHC) antibodies (D4D6 and SP384 clones) and consistency with the fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) results in NSCLC. To investigate the effectiveness of the commonly used two IHC antibodies (SP384 and D4D6 clones) to detect ROS1 rearrangement in NSCLC. A retrospective cohort study. The study included 103 samples diagnosed with NSCLC, confirmed using IHC and FISH ROS1 results (14 positives, four discordant, and 85 consecutive negatives), with sufficient tissue samples (≥ 50 tumor cells). All samples were initially tested with ROS1-IHC antibodies (D4D6 and SP384 clones); their ROS1 status was then analyzed using the FISH method. Finally, samples with discordant IHC and FISH results were confirmed using the reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction method. The sensitivity of SP384 and D4D6 clones of ROS1 antibody was 100% with a ≥ 1 + cut-off. When the ≥ 2 + cut-off was used, the sensitivity rate for the SP384 clone was 100%, whereas the sensitivity for the D4D6 clone was 42.86%. ROS1 FISH rearranged samples were positive for both clones, but SP384 had generally higher intensity than D4D6. The mean IHC score was + 2 for SP384 and + 1.17 for D4D6. SP384 mostly tended to have a higher IHC score intensity, which made the evaluation easier than D4D6. SP384 has a higher sensitivity than D4D6. However, false positives were found in both clones. There was no significant correlation between ROS1 FISH-positivity percentage with SP384 (p = 0.713, p = 0.108) and D4D6 (p = 0.26, p = -0.323) IHC staining intensity. The staining patterns of both clones were similar (homogeneity/heterogeneity). Our findings show that the SP384 clone is more sensitive than D4D6. However, SP384 can also cause false positive results like D4D6. Knowing the variable diagnostic performance of different ROS1 antibodies before using them in clinical applications is necessary. IHC-positive results should be confirmed using FISH.

Tyrosine kinase alterations in colorectal cancer with emphasis on the distinct clinicopathological characteristics.

Tyrosine kinase (TK) alterations, such as anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) fusion, neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) fusion, c-ros oncogene 1 (ROS1) fusion and mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) exon 14 skipping, have been reported in colorectal cancers (CRC). We have previously reported CRCs with NTRK fusion among our cohort. However, their clinicopathological features have not been fully elucidated. Tissue microarray (TMA)-based immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed on 951 CRC lesions from 944 patients. IHC was evaluated as positive or negative for ALK and ROS1 and 0 to 3+ for c-MET. For ALK and ROS1 IHC-positive cases, RNA-based imbalanced gene expression assays, Archer FusionPlex assays and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) followed by Sanger sequencing were performed. For c-MET IHC 3+ cases, RT-PCR followed by Sanger sequencing were performed. ALK IHC was positive in three cases (0.2%) and all showed imbalanced ALK gene expression. The following ALK fusions were confirmed: EML4 (exon 21)::ALK (exon 20), EML4 (exon 6)::ALK (exon 19) and HMBOX1 (exon 6)::ALK (exon 20). Two showed microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient, and all were located in the right colon. ROS1 IHC was positive in one case; however, imbalanced expression and ROS1 fusion was negative. Forty-two cases (4.4%) showed c-MET IHC3+. MET exon 14 skipping was confirmed in nine cases. All cases were microsatellite stable/MMR-proficient, and eight were located in the left colon and rectum. CRCs with these TK alterations had distinct clinicopathological features. Together with our previous study, 15 cases (1.6%) harboured targetable TK alterations (three NTRK fusion, three ALK fusion, nine MET exon 14 skipping).

Routine Clinically Detected Increased ROS1 Transcripts Are Related With ROS1 Expression by Immunohistochemistry and Associated With EGFR Mutations in Lung Adenocarcinoma

IntroductionTranslocations of the ROS1 gene were found to drive tumorigenesis in 1% to 2% of lung adenocarcinoma. In clinical practice, ROS1 rearrangements are often screened by immunohistochemistry (IHC) before confirmation with either fluorescence in situ hybridization or molecular techniques. This screening test leads to a non-negligible number of cases that have equivocal or positive ROS1 IHC, without ROS1 translocation. MethodsIn this study, we have analyzed retrospectively 1021 cases of nonsquamous NSCLC having both ROS1 IHC and molecular analysis using next-generation sequencing. ResultsROS1 IHC was negative in 938 cases (91.9%), equivocal in 65 cases (6.4%), and positive in 18 cases (1.7%). Among these 83 equivocal or positive cases, only two were ROS1 rearranged, leading to a low predictive positive value of the IHC test (2%). ROS1-positive IHC was correlated with an increased mRNA ROS1 transcripts. Moreover, we have found a mean statistically significant relationship between ROS1 expression and EGFR gene mutations, suggesting a crosstalk mechanism between these oncogenic driver molecules. ConclusionThis study demonstrates that ROS1 IHC represents true ROS1 mRNA expression, and raises the question of a potential benefit of combined targeted therapy in EGFR-mutated NSCLC.

A Real-World Experience from a Single Center (LPCE, Nice, France) Highlights the Urgent Need to Abandon Immunohistochemistry for ROS1 Rearrangement Screening of Advanced Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

The detection of ROS1 rearrangements in metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung carcinoma (NS-NSCLC) permits administration of efficient targeted therapy. Detection is based on a testing algorithm associated with ROS1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) screening followed by ROS1 FISH and/or next generation sequencing (NGS) to confirm positivity. However, (i) ROS1 rearrangements are rare (1-2% of NS-NSCLC), (ii) the specificity of ROS1 IHC is not optimal, and (iii) ROS1 FISH is not widely available, making this algorithm challenging to interpret time-consuming. We evaluated RNA NGS, which was used as reflex testing for ROS1 rearrangements in NS-NSCLC with the aim of replacing ROS1 IHC as a screening method. ROS1 IHC and RNA NGS were prospectively performed in 810 NS-NSCLC. Positive results were analyzed by ROS1 FISH. ROS1 IHC was positive in 36/810 (4.4%) cases that showed variable staining intensity while NGS detected ROS1 rearrangements in 16/810 (1.9%) cases. ROS1 FISH was positive in 15/810 (1.8%) of ROS1 IHC positive cases and in all positive ROS1 NGS cases. Obtaining both ROS1 IHC and ROS1 FISH reports took an average of 6 days, while obtaining ROS1 IHC and RNA NGS reports took an average of 3 days. These results showed that systematic screening for the ROS1 status using IHC must be replaced by NGS reflex testing.

Correlation of ROS1 (D4D6) Immunohistochemistry with ROS1 Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Assay in a Contemporary Cohort of Pulmonary Adenocarcinomas.

Sambit K. MohantyObjective Repressor of Silencing ( ROS1 ) gene rearrangement in the lung adenocarcinomas is one of the targetable mutually exclusive genomic alteration. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), immunohistochemistry (IHC), next-generation sequencing, and reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction assays are generally used to detect ROS1 gene alterations. We evaluated the correlation between ROS1 IHC and FISH analysis considering FISH as the gold standard method to determine the utility of IHC as a screening method for lung adenocarcinoma. Materials and Methods A total of 374 advanced pulmonary adenocarcinoma patients were analyzed for ROS1 IHC on Ventana Benchmark XT platform using D4D6 rabbit monoclonal antibody. FISH assay was performed in parallel in all these cases using the Vysis ROS1 Break Apart FISH probe. Statistical Analysis The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy were evaluated. Results A total of 17 tumors were positive either by IHC or FISH analysis or both (true positive). Four tumors were positive by IHC (H-score range: 120-270), while negative on FISH analysis (false positive by IHC). One tumor was IHC negative, but positive by FISH analysis (false negative). The sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were 94.4% (confidence interval [CI]: 72.71-99.86%), 63.6% (CI: 30.79-89.07%), 2.6 (CI: 1.18-5.72), 0.09 (CI: 0.01-0.62), 80.95% (CI: 65.86-90.35%), 87.5% (CI: 49.74-98.02%), and 82.76%, respectively. Conclusion ROS1 IHC has high sensitivity at a cost of lower specificity for the detection of ROS1 gene rearrangement. All IHC positive cases should undergo a confirmatory FISH test as this testing algorithm stands as a reliable and economic tool to screen ROS1 rearrangement in lung adenocarcinomas.

Abstract 1271: Detection of ALK, ROS1 and RET fusion transcripts in FFPE samples of non-small cell lung cancer patients using a novel RT-PCR based assay

Abstract Background and objective: Detection of genomic rearrangements like ALK fusions are mandatory in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) as those alterations can be targeted by an increasing number of drugs. Fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) is the gold standard but multiplexed technologies allow the analysis of several targets simultaneously. We have evaluated a novel RT-PCR based assay for the detection of ALK, ROS1 and RET rearrangement in NSCLC patients in this research study. Materials and Methods: FFPE tissue sections from 309 patients with late stage NSCLC were screened for ALK and ROS1 status using immunohistochemistry (IHC) and confirmed with FISH. Total nucleic acids were extracted from tissue sections using the Maxwell RSC RNA FFPE kit (Promega). Fusions were detected by RT-PCR using a prototype ALK/RET/ROS1 Fusion Panel assay (Roche). A subset of discordant cases were further analyzed by RNA sequencing using the QIAseq Targeted RNAscan Lung Cancer Panel (Qiagen). Results: All 309 samples were tested by RT-PCR with a 0% invalid rate. ALK fusions were detected in 39 samples: 29 were ALK FISH+, 5 were ALK FISH not contributive, 3 were ALK FISH- (less than 15% tumor cells presenting a gene fusion), and 2 were ALK IHC- and not tested by FISH. ROS1 fusions were detected in 12 samples: 9 were ROS1 FISH+, 1 was ROS1 FISH-, and 2 were ROS1 IHC- and not tested by FISH. RET fusions were detected in 3 samples. The remaining 255 samples were RT-PCR-: 5 were ALK FISH+ containing fusions not covered by the RT-PCR assay, 1 was ALK FISH+ containing ALK polysomy, 1 was ROS1 FISH+ containing a fusion not covered by the RT-PCR assay, 1 was ROS1 FISH+ containing ROS1 amplification, 1 was ROS1 FISH+ but ROS1 RNAseq-, and 246 samples were IHC- or IHC+/FISH-. The overall concordance rate between RT-PCR and FISH for ALK and ROS1 gene rearrangements was 91.9%. Although the RT-PCR assay did not detect 5 ALK and 1 ROS1 fusions due to design limitations, it did identify the presence of fusions in 9 tumors that were undetected by FISH (8 ALK and 1 ROS1). Conclusion: Using limited amount of biological material, RT-PCR was able to detect a substantial majority of ALK and ROS1 fusions identified by FISH, as well as fusions that were missed by the initial IHC/FISH screening. This study demonstrates RT-PCR as a feasible approach to detecting fusions in NSCLC. Citation Format: Marc G. Denis, Audrey Vallée, Christine Sagan, Guillaume Herbreteau, Sandrine Charpentier, Jaya Rajamani, Michael Lee, Ellen Ordinario. Detection of ALK, ROS1 and RET fusion transcripts in FFPE samples of non-small cell lung cancer patients using a novel RT-PCR based assay [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 1271.

Reflex testing in non-small cell lung carcinoma using DNA- and RNA-based next-generation sequencing-a single-center experience.

BackgroundTargeted treatment modalities for non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) patients are expanding rapidly and demand a constant adaptation of molecular testing strategies. In this regard, broad reflex testing via next-generation sequencing (NGS) might have several advantages. However, real-world data regarding practical feasibility and clinical relevance are scarce, especially for RNA-based NGS.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study comparing NGS use in two consecutive years (2019 and 2020). In 2019, reflex testing mainly consisted of DNA-based NGS for mutations and immunohistochemistry (IHC) for ALK, ROS1, and NTRK fusion products. At the beginning of 2020, our approach has changed, with DNA- and RNA-based NGS panels now being simultaneously performed. This change in protocol allowed us to retrospectively evaluate if broad molecular reflex testing brings additional value to lung cancer patients.ResultsWithin the whole cohort (n=432), both DNA- and RNA-based NGS yielded almost always evaluable results. Only in 6 cases, the RNA content was too little for an appropriate analysis. After integrating RNA-based NGS in the reflex testing approach, the number of detected fusions increased significantly (2.6% vs. 8.2%; P=0.0021), but also more patients received targeted therapies. Furthermore, exceedingly rare alterations were more likely to be detected, including the so far undescribed EGFR-NUP160 fusion.ConclusionsOur study demonstrates that a comprehensive approach to reflex NGS testing is practically feasible and clinically relevant. Including RNA-based panels in the reflex testing approach results in more detected fusions and more patients receiving targeted therapies. Additionally, this broad molecular profiling strategy identifies patients with emerging biomarkers, underscoring its usefulness in the rapidly evolving landscape of targeted therapies.

ROS1 rearrangements in lung adenocarcinomas are defined by diffuse strong immunohistochemical expression of ROS1

A small subset of lung adenocarcinomas harbour ROS1 gene arrangements and are amenable to tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. Current practice in Australia involves screening for ROS1 rearrangements in adenocarcinomas using ROS1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) followed by confirmatory molecular testing such as fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH), if other known genetic driver alterations are absent. The best threshold to determine ROS1 IHC positivity is not well defined, however, and this study aims to determine the optimal threshold for ROS1 IHC screening to identify ROS1-rearranged lung adenocarcinomas. A total of 177 lung adenocarcinomas tested for a ROS1 rearrangement by FISH at our institution between 2017 and 2020 due to presence of ROS1 IHC staining were included in the study. ROS1 IHC staining was assessed by scoring the staining intensity (0, 1, 2, or 3+) and multiplying by the percentage of positive cells to generate an H-score. IHC H-scores were compared with FISH. Of 177 cases, 32 (18%) were ROS1 FISH-positive and 145 (82%) were negative. FISH-positive cases had a median H-score of 300 (range 200-300; mean 290.3) and negative cases had a median H-score of 40 (range 0-300; mean 63). All FISH-positive cases showed strong and diffuse IHC positivity. Using a threshold H-score of 200, the sensitivity of identifying ROS1 rearrangements was 100% and the specificity was 95% amongst cases referred with ROS1 IHC positivity. Adenocarcinomas with a FISH-confirmed ROS1 rearrangement demonstrate diffuse, strong (2-3+) IHC staining. Cases with weak, patchy ROS1 IHC staining are not associated with ROS1 rearrangements and in these cases FISH testing is of little to no utility.

ROS1 rearrangements in non-small cell lung cancer: screening by immunohistochemistry using proportion of cells staining without intensity and excluding cases with MAPK pathway drivers improves test performance

Therapeutically actionable ROS1 rearrangements have been described in 1-3% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Screening for ROS1 rearrangements is recommended to be by immunohistochemistry (IHC), followed by confirmation with fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) or sequencing. However, in practise ROS1 IHC presents difficulties due to conflicting scoring systems, multiple clones and expression in tumours that are wild-type for ROS1. We assessed ROS1 IHC in 285 consecutive cases of NSCLC with non-squamous histology over a nearly 2-year period. IHC was scored with ROS1 clone D4D6 (n=270), clone SP384 (n=275) or both clones (n=260). Results were correlated with ROS1 break-apart FISH (n=67), ALK status (n=194), and sequence data of EGFR (n=178) and other drivers, where possible. ROS1 expression was detected in 161/285 cases (56.5%), including 13/14 ROS1 FISH-positive cases. There was no ROS1 expression in one ROS1 FISH-positive case in which sequencing detected an ALK-EML4 fusion, but not a ROS1 fusion. The other 13 ROS1 FISH-positive cases showed moderate to strong staining with both IHC clones. However, one case with a TPM3-ROS1 fusion would have been scored as negative with SP384 and D4D6 clones by some previous criteria. ROS1 expression was also detected in 58/285 cases (20.4%) that had driver mutations in genes other than ROS1. A sensitivity of 100% for detecting a ROS1 rearrangement by FISH was achieved by omitting intensity from the IHC scoring criteria and expression in >0% cells with D4D6 or in ≥50% cells with SP384. Excluding cases with driver events in any MAPK pathway gene (e.g., in ALK, EGFR, KRAS, BRAF, ERBB2 and MET) substantially reduced the number of cases proceeding to ROS1 FISH. Only 15.9% of MAPK-negative NSCLC would proceed to FISH for an IHC threshold of >0% cells with D4D6, with a specificity of 42.4%. For a threshold of ≥50% cells with SP384, only 18.5% of MAPK-negative cases would proceed to FISH, with a specificity of 31.4%. Based on our data we suggest an algorithm for screening for ROS1 rearrangements in NSCLC in which ROS1 FISH is only performed in cases that have been demonstrated to lack activating mutations in any MAPK pathway gene by comprehensive sequencing and ALK IHC, and show staining at any intensity in ≥50% of cells with clone SP384, or >0% cells with D4D6.

P59.27 Complementary Utility of Combined ALK/ROS1 FISH with Immunohistochemistry for ALK/ROS1 Rearrangement Testing in Lung Cancer

Testing for EGFR mutations, ALK and ROS1 rearrangements and BRAF mutations are now recommended as the essential minimum predictive biomarkers to be tested in primary non-squamous NSCLC patients presenting with advanced disease. While the ALK D5F3 Ventana immunohistochemistry (IHC) Assay is approved for detection of ALK rearrangements and for targeted therapy, ROS1 IHC only serves as a screening tool for ROS1 rearrangements with demonstration of gene fusions by molecular methods required for confirmation and targeted treatment. Nevertheless, equivocal IHC results, although uncommon, still occur with the D5F3 ALK assay necessitating complementary methods for confirmation. The recent availability of combined ALK/ROS1 break-apart fluorescence in-situ hybridisation (FISH) probes offer the advantage of tissue conservation with ability to analyse both gene alterations in a single tissue section. The aim of the present study was to study the utility of the combined ALK/ROS1 FISH assay as a complement to ALK and ROS1 IHC in routine predictive biomarker testing algorithms. Over a 6-year study period, all EGFR wild type NSCLC samples were subject to automated ALK D5F3 Ventana IHC assay and ROS1 IHC using the D4D6 (Cell signalling technology) clone as a manual lab developed test. Diffuse strong granular staining in tumor cells for ALK and ROS1 protein was interpreted as positive. All cases of equivocal ALK staining and positive ROS1 staining was subject to combined ALK/ROS1 FISH using the FlexISH ALK/ROS1 DistinguISH Probe (Vysis) performed as per manufacturers’ instructions. Presence of ALK/ROS1 break apart signals and/or isolated ALK/ROS1 3’ signals in >15% of interpretable tumour nuclei was considered as positive for ALK or ROS1 rearrangement. The ALK Ventana Assay was performed in 711 formalin fixed paraffin embedded EGFR wild type NSCLC samples including biopsies, lymph node excisions and cell blocks. Of these, 12% (85/711) were positive, 2% (13/711) were equivocal, 75% (539/711) were negative, while in the remaining 11% (76/711), result could not be evaluated due to exhaustion of tumor tissue. FISH analysis in four of the ALK IHC equivocal cases show absence of ALK translocations while no tissue remained for FISH analysis in the remaining equivocal cases. ROS1 IHC was performed in 434 cases of the above cohort of which 7% (30/434) were positive. ROS1 immunopositivity was enriched among ALK IHC positive cases with 43% (19/44) of ALK IHC positive cases also showing protein expression of ROS1. FISH analysis revealed ROS1 translocation in two cases (both showing diffuse strong ROS1 protein expression and negative ALK IHC) while all dual ALK/ROS IHC positive cases tested by FISH showed presence of only ALK rearrangements with non-rearranged ROS1 signals. Tissue adequacy remains the major limiting factor for predictive biomarker testing in lung cancer. The use of combined ALK-ROS FISH allows for excellent demonstration of ALK and ROS1 rearrangements in the same section using the same criteria validated in single gene break apart FISH probes. ROS1 protein is commonly overexpressed in ALK rearranged NSCLC and may represent cross reactivity with ALK or a related protein.

FP12.08 Lung Adenocarcinomas with ROS1 Rearrangement show Diffuse Strong ROS1 Immunohistochemical Staining

A small proportion of lung adenocarcinomas harbour ROS1 gene arrangements and are sensitive to ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors. In Australia, ROS1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) is used to screen for ROS1 rearrangements in lung adenocarcinomas followed by confirmatory molecular testing such as fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH), if other genetic driver alterations are negative. The optimal threshold for determining ROS1 IHC positivity is not well defined, and this study aims to determine the best threshold for ROS1 IHC screening to identify all ROS1 rearranged lung adenocarcinomas.

Optimising fusion detection through sequential DNA and RNA molecular profiling of non-small cell lung cancer

ObjectivesThere is an increasing number of driver fusions in NSCLC which are amenable to targeted therapy. Panel testing for fusions is increasingly appropriate but can be costly and requires adequate good quality biopsy material. In light of the typical mutual exclusivity of driver events in NSCLC, the objective of this study was to trial a novel testing pathway, supported by industrial collaboration, in which only patients negative for driver mutations on DNA-NGS were submitted for fusion panel analysis. Materials and methodsOver 18 months, all patients from a single centre with non-squamous NSCLC were submitted for DNA-NGS, plus ALK and ROS1 immunohistochemistry +/− FISH. Those which were negative for a driver mutation were then recalled for RNA panel testing. Results307 samples were referred for DNA-NGS mutation analysis, of which, 10% of cases were unsuitable for or failed DNA-NGS analysis. Driver mutations were detected in 61% (167/275) of all those successfully tested. Of those without a driver mutation and with some remaining tissue available, 28% had insufficient tissue/extracted RNA or failed RNA-NGS. Of those successfully tested, 24% (17/72) had a fusion gene detected involving either ALK, ROS, MET, RET, FGFR or EGFR. Overall, 66% (184/277) of patients had a driver event detected through the combination of DNA and RNA panels. ConclusionSequential DNA and RNA based molecular profiling increased the efficacy of detecting fusion driven NSCLCs. Continued optimisation of tissue procurement, handling and the diagnostic pathways for gene fusion analysis is necessary to reduce analysis failure rates and improve detection rate for treatment with the next generation of small molecule inhibitors.

Reflex ROS1 IHC Screening with FISH Confirmation for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer-A Cost-Efficient Strategy in a Public Healthcare System.

ROS1 rearrangements are identified in 1–2% of lung adenocarcinoma cases, and reflex testing is guideline-recommended. We developed a decision model for population-based ROS1 testing from a Canadian public healthcare perspective to determine the strategy that optimized detection of true-positive (TP) cases while minimizing costs and turnaround time (TAT). Eight diagnostic strategies were compared, including reflex single gene testing via immunohistochemistry (IHC) screening, fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH), next-generation sequencing (NGS), and biomarker-informed (EGFR/ALK/KRAS wildtype) testing initiated by pathologists and clinician-initiated strategies. Reflex IHC screening with FISH confirmation of positive cases yielded the best results for TAT, TP detection rate, and cost. IHC screening saved CAD 1,000,000 versus reflex FISH testing. NGS was the costliest reflex strategy. Biomarker-informed testing was cost-efficient but delayed TAT. Clinician-initiated testing was the least costly but resulted in long TAT and missed TP cases, highlighting the importance of reflex testing. Thus, reflex IHC screening for ROS1 with FISH confirmation provides a cost-efficient strategy with short TAT and maximizes the number of TP cases detected.

An Update on Molecular Genetic Aberrations in Spitz Melanocytic Proliferations: Correlation with Morphological Features and Biological Behavior.

The aim of the paper is to give an update on molecular genetic aberrations in Spitz melanocytic proliferations with special emphasis on their correlation with morphological features and biological behavior. The Spitz group of melanocytic proliferations is defined by a combination of distinctive morphological features and driver molecular genetic events. Morphologically, these neoplasms are characterized by large, oval, polygonal, or spindled melanocytes with abundant eosinophilic cytoplasm, vesicular nuclei with prominent nucleoli, often in association with epidermal hyperplasia. Molecular aberrations in Spitz melanocytic proliferations can be divided into two main groups, according to the driver genetic change: 1) 11p amplification/HRAS mutation, present in about 20% of cases, and 2) kinase fusions, present in about 50%, further subdivided into tyrosine kinase fusions (ALK, ROS1, NTRK1, NTRK3, MET, RET) or serine-threonine kinase fusions (MAP3K8, BRAF). Driver genetic aberrations can be detected along the whole biological spectrum of Spitz melanocytic proliferations, and are mutually exclusive. Although driver genetic aberrations enable proliferation of melanocytes, additional genetic events (often biallelic inactivation of CDKN2A and TERT promoter mutations) are necessary for the development of overt Spitz malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: Recent studies have demonstrated that certain driver genetic aberrations are more often associated with the benign spectrum of Spitz melanocytic proliferations and indolent biological behavior (11p amplification/HRAS mutation, tyrosine kinase fusions). In contrast, some driver aberrations are more frequent in the atypical/malignant spectrum of Spitz melanocytic proliferations with a potential for aggressive biological behavior (serine-threonine kinase fusions). In addition, certain driver aberrations are often associated with distinctive morphological features. However, none of the morphological features is entirely specific for any of these driver genetic aberrations. Immunohistochemistry for ALK, ROS1, and pan-TRK can be used for screening purposes to detect corresponding fusion proteins.

Feasibility of comprehensive genotyping specimens from radial endobronchial ultrasonography and electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy.

IntroductionMini-invasive bronchoscopic techniques (such as radial endobronchial ultrasonography (rEBUS) and electromagnetic navigation (EMN)) have been developed to reach the peripheral lung but result in small samples. The feasibility of an adequate molecular testing from these specimens has been very little studied.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed EMN and rEBUS procedures performed in patients diagnosed with lung cancer in our institution in 2017 and 2018. We analysed the sensitivity for rEBUS and EMN and each sampling method, and the feasibility of a comprehensive molecular testing.ResultsIn total, 317 rEBUS and 14 EMN were performed. Median sizes of tumours were 16 and 32 mm for EMN and rEBUS, respectively. Overall sensitivity for rEBUS and EMN was 84.3%. Cytology was found to be complementary with biopsies, with 13.3% of cancer diagnosed on cytology while biopsies were negative. Complication rate was 2.4% (pneumothorax 1.5%, mild haemoptysis 0.9%). Genotyping (immunohistochemistry for ROS1 and ALK followed by fluorescence in situ hybridisation if positive and hybrid capture next-generation sequencing covering 48 genes), when ordered (n=188), was feasible in 69.1% (EGFR 17.7%, KRAS 31.7%, BRAF 4.8%, ALK 1.2%, MET 3.1%, HER2 0.8%). PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1) expression, when ordered (n=232), could be analysed in 94% of cases. Overall, 56.9% (33 out of 58) of patients for whom genotyping was not feasible underwent a second sampling (12 pretreatment, 21 at progression), allowing for the detection of six actionable genotypes (five EGFR, one MET).ConclusionrEBUS and EMN are sensitive and safe procedures that result in limited samples, often not suitable for genotyping, highlighting the importance of integrating liquid biopsy in routine testing.