MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414904246 · doi:10.1016/j.esmoop.2025.105846

Critical insights on real-life PD-L1 histopathological workflow and assessment in esophageal, esophagogastric junction, and gastric carcinoma in Italy

2025· article· en· W4414904246 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandro Gambella, Federica Grillo, Paola Parente, Alessandro Vanoli, Alessandro Caputo, Michele Paudice, Valentina Angerilli, Federica Castri, Alessandro Pastorino, Matteo Fassan, Luca Mastracci, Luca Albarello, Maria Raffaella Ambrosio, M.R. Aprile, Isabella Banchelli, V. Barresi, Paola Billo, Paola Cassoni, Bruna Cerbelli, Maria DʼArmiento, Giuseppe De Lisi, Enrico Costantino Falco, Dennis Fiorini, Marta Fortunato, Stefano Lazzi, Stefano La Rosa, G Locci, Maria Cristina Macciomei, M. Martini, Laura Melocchi, P. Morbini, Vincenzo Nardini, Iacopo Panarese, Bruna Pozzi, Andrea Remo, Lindsey Savino, Paola Spaggiari, F. Sommavilla

Bibliographic record

VenueESMO Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
FundersMinistero della Salute
KeywordsWorkflowReliability (semiconductor)CancerSelection (genetic algorithm)Clinical PracticePatient care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) have improved survival in locally advanced and metastatic esophageal, esophagogastric junction, and gastric carcinoma (GEC). Patient selection for ICI-treatment relies on PD-L1 protein expression assessment via immunohistochemistry (IHC). This study aimed to evaluate the real-world assessment of PD-L1 IHC results compared with clinical trial data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicentric, real-world retrospective study analyzed PD-L1 IHC data from 28 Italian pathology centers of GEC cases diagnosed between October 2023 and September 2024. The study documented PD-L1 expression distribution via combined positive (CPS), tumor proportion (TPS), and tumor area positivity (TAP) scores, and investigated the impact of several factors on IHC results. RESULTS: We collected 1936 cases: 1802 adenocarcinomas (ADCA), 131 squamous carcinomas (SCC), and 3 carcinomas of non-specific histotype. Most institutions reported CPS and TPS data, whereas a minority used TAP. Overall, CPS, TPS, and TAP scores were in line with the data in literature and clinical trials for both ADCA and SCC, but inter-institutional heterogeneity was observed as represented by CPS ≥1 ADCA cases (range among institutions: 43.6%-100%). Inter-institutional heterogeneity was significantly associated with several variables, including (i) PD-L1 IHC case workload, with lower workload centers reporting more CPS ≥1 cases on average, and (ii) PD-L1 clone, with the 22C3 clone showing higher CPS scores than the SP263 clone. Tissue block aging was also significantly associated with a lower PD-L1 score, with a critical time window at 24-60 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the alignment of GEC PD-L1 expression in Italian real-world practice with clinical trials. Inter-institutional variability and the significant influence of preanalytical factors, particularly tissue aging and PD-L1 clone, highlight important challenges in routine PD-L1 testing. Addressing these issues is crucial to enhance the reliability of PD-L1 IHC assessment and ensure optimal patient selection for ICIs in GEC.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESMO OpenSame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207