Can laboratories' experience of PD-L1 companion diagnostic testing be improved? | Diaceutics

Can laboratories’ experience of PD-L1 companion diagnostic testing be improved? 

November 1st, 2017

During the last few years there has been intense debate about the biomarker PD-L1. It has become a significant feature of precision medicine but its uptake in diagnostic testing has been affected by a number of factors such as availability in labs, confusion over testing options, the platforms required and the interpretation and reporting of results. It’s a situation Diaceutics has been following closely by tracking PD-L1 developments and providing analyses of the global laboratory landscape. The subject arose again recently as we attended the 2017 Institute of Biomedical Science Congress in the UK where there was discussion around how laboratories rise to the challenges of PD-L1 diagnostic testing for pharma companies.  

When a drug with different companion (and complementary) diagnostics is released, labs are faced with a number of issues that can lead to confusion and uncertainty around testing. It is certainly a factor in the relatively slow adoption of PD-L1 testing across Europe.  

  • There are issues around platforms – a pharma company might expect a lab to invest in a new platform for its particular companion diagnostic test. If, however, the laboratory already has a different platform, it will not necessarily have the resources to invest in not only a new platform but the training for staff to use it. So this may not be a viable option. 
  • There are issues around the testing protocol – some labs face questions from diagnostic companies about their testing methods for PD-L1 and validation within the lab which may not be fully aligned with the test label and be a cause for confusion.  
  • There are further issues around samples – a lot of clinical trials for PD-L1 have used core biopsies but now there is increasing evidence to show good concordance between FFPE cell block testing and core biopsies in PD-L1 testing. The main UK reference centres are saying there isn’t a problem with FFPE cell block testing as long as laboratories validate them in-house on their own samples. There is still confusion among smaller laboratories, however, which are being told by the diagnostic companies that those samples are not validated with their kit.   

PD-L1 is not an easy test to interpret and this has impacted the rate of test availability in labs. More labs are making the test available but confusion still exists about which test to adopt for each therapy and indication. It’s important, therefore, for stakeholders to deliver broad and up-to-date information and education to support laboratories. Diagnostic companies have contributed to training for some pathologists and laboratories but in reality this is needed across the board in relation to PD-L1.  

Laboratories play such a vital role in precision medicine and ensuring patients do not miss out on testing, yet we know they often feel forgotten. At Diaceutics we understand their concerns about the rapidly changing world of diagnostic testing for pharma companies. With our experts coming from the laboratory and quality assessment spaces, we recognise and appreciate the service they provide. We have built the global network and the regional teams of experts to advise and support labs with continuing education, workshops and direct communication with pathologists to address issues such as those outlined above.  

Precision medicine is about getting the right test to the patient at the right time, but without the laboratory this would not happen. It is imperative, therefore, that labs are educated, supported and appreciated in their work, especially when new biomarkers or therapy indications drive such rapid change in the companion diagnostic landscape. 

On November 15, 2017, Diaceutics is hosting a webinar discussing Why 50% of patients could be missing out on the right targeted therapy, which will go into more detail about some of these issues. To register for the webinar please click here. 


Webinars & Podcasts

August 9th, 2018
Podcast: Oncology Patient Research
Why do we need to talk biomarkers with patients? Senior Director of Market Research at Diaceutics, Marianne Fillion, recently spearheaded an effort to gather insights directly from oncology patients to get an understanding of what they know about ...
April 20th, 2018
Podcast: PM Readiness Report 2018
Peter Keeling discusses the landscape and challenges for precision medicine, companion diagnostics, CDx or biomarker and conduit diagnostics are discussed including global laboratory test data analysis and forecasts for budget impact and value.
View all

Expert Insights

April 19th, 2018
The CMS National Coverage Decision on NGS
I. Introduction On March 16, 2018, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) finalized a National Coverage Determination (NCD) that cove...
January 19th, 2018
What does the EU IVD Regulation mean for companion diagnostics and LDTs?
Dave Smart, PhD, Director at Diaceutics, discusses the introduction of the EU IVD Regulation. While it is considered a necessary step, the Regulati...
View all expert insights

Competitive Benchmarking Reports

March 16th, 2018
PM Readiness Report 2018 Summary
March 14th, 2017
Pharma Readiness for Diagnostic Integration 2017
View all reports


May 23rd, 2019
Diaceutics reviews the ongoing debate on diagnostics reform legislation
Thought leaders at Diaceutics recently authored a peer-reviewed article that covers the ongoing national debate over diagnostics reform legislation in the United States. The article is now available online ahead of print in the Journal of Molecula...
September 11th, 2018
BRAF mutation testing in melanoma – Poster presented at European Congress of Pathology 2018
BRAF mutation testing in melanoma: a study including Austria, Germany and UK, highlighting concordance for current technologies, and potential requirement of more sensitive technologies in future applications.
View all publications