Background. Innovative drugs targeting the PD1/PD-L1 axis have opened promising scenarios in modern cancer therapy. Plenty of assays and scoring systems have been developed for the evaluation of PD-L1 immunohistochemical expression, so far considered the most reliable therapeutic predictive marker. Methods. By gathering the opinion of acknowledged experts in dedicated fields of pathology, we sought to update the currently available evidence on PD-L1 assessment in various types of tumors. Results. Robust data were progressively collected for several anatomic districts and leading international agencies to approve specific protocols: among these, TPS with 22C3, SP142 and SP263 clones in lung cancer; IC with SP142 antibody in breast, lung and urothelial tumors; and CPS with 22C3/SP263 assays in head and neck and urothelial carcinomas. On the other hand, for other malignancies, such as gastroenteric neoplasms, immunotherapy has been only recently introduced, often for particular histotypes, so specific guidelines are still lacking. Conclusions. PD-L1 immunohistochemical scoring is currently the basis for allowing many cancer patients to receive properly targeted therapies. While protocols supported by proven data are already available for many tumors, dedicated studies and clinical trials focusing on harmonization of the topic in other still only partially explored fields are surely yet advisable.

Aims To evaluate the accuracy, consumable cost and time around testing (TAT) of a next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay, the Ion Torrent AmpliSeq Colon and Lung Cancer Panel, as an alternative to Sanger sequencing to genotype KRAS, NRAS and BRAF in colorectal cancer patients. Methods The Ion Torrent panel was first verified on cell lines and on control samples and then prospectively applied to routine specimens (n=114), with Sanger sequencing as reference. Results The Ion Torrent panel detected mutant alleles at the 5% level on cell lines and correctly classified all control tissues. The Ion Torrent assay was successfully carried out on most (95.6%) routine diagnostic samples. Of these, 12 (11%) harboured mutations in the BRAF gene and 47 (43%) in either of the two RAS genes, in two cases with a low abundance of RAS mutant allele which was missed by Sanger sequencing. The mean TAT, from sample receipt to reporting, was 10.4 (Sanger) and 13.0 (Ion Torrent) working days. The consumable cost for genotyping KRAS, NRAS and BRAF was €196 (Sanger) and €187 (Ion Torrent). Conclusions Ion Torrent AmpliSeq Colon and Lung Cancer Panel sequencing is as robust as Sanger sequencing in routine diagnostics to select patients for anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Aims: The incidence of RAS/RAF/PI3KA and TP53 gene mutations in colorectal cancer (CRC) is well established. Less information, however, is available on other components of the CRC genomic landscape, which are potential CRC prognostic/predictive markers. Methods: Following a previous validation study, ion-semiconductor next-generation sequencing (NGS) was employed to process 653 routine CRC samples by a multiplex PCR targeting 91 hotspot regions in 22 CRC significant genes. Results: A total of 796 somatic mutations in 499 (76.4%) tumours were detected. Besides RAS/RAF/PI3KA and TP53, other 12 genes showed at least one mutation including FBXW7 (6%), PTEN (2.8%), SMAD4 (2.1%), EGFR (1.2%), CTNNB1 (1.1%), AKT1 (0.9%), STK11 (0.8%), ERBB2 (0.6%), ERBB4 (0.6%), ALK (0.2%), MAP2K1 (0.2%) and NOTCH1 (0.2%). Conclusions: In a routine diagnostic setting, NGS had the potential to generate robust and comprehensive genetic information also including less frequently mutated genes potentially relevant for prognostic assessments or for actionable treatments.

This review is focused on the challenges in standardising and optimising molecular testing workflow in cytopathology. Although cytological samples yield optimal quality DNA, whose minimal amounts in most cases suffice even for multigene mutational profiling, the success of molecular testing is strongly dependent on standardised preanalytical protocols for maximising DNA yield and quality. Sample cytopreparation influences, even more, the quality of RNA and consequently the potential success of reverse transcription-PCR. Here, the educational and technical involvement of the cytopathologist as a relevant component of a multidisciplinary team, in the issues related to test request, specimen collection, fixation, processing, staining, tumour fraction enrichment, DNA quality/quantity assessment and storage conditions is discussed. In addition, the specific sample requirements related to more recent technological developments are examined, underlining the modern role of the cytopathologist, whose continuous education is crucial to meet the opportunities of molecular medicine.