The
slide to be stained for CD138 comprised:
1. Ovarian serous carcinoma, 2. Tonsil, 3. Appendix, 4. Diffuse
large B-cell lymphoma, germinal cell like (GCL) type, 5.
Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, activated B-cell like
(ABCL) type, 6. Plasmacytoma.
All tissues were fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin.
Criteria for assessing a CD138 staining as optimal included:
-
A moderate to strong, distinct predominantly membranous staining
of the activated late stage B-cells in the germinal centres and the plasma cells in the tonsil and in
the appendix.
-
A strong, distinct membranous staining of the columnar epithelial
cells of the appendix and the squamous epithelial cells in the
tonsil.
-
A moderate to strong membranous staining of the majority of the
neoplastic cells of the ABCL diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and the
ovarian serous carcinoma, and a distinct reaction in the stromal
cells in both tumour types.
-
No staining in the neoplastic cells and the stromal component of
the GCL diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.
79 laboratories submitted stains. One laboratory used an
inappropriate Ab, clone VS38c, and in one case, the CD38 Ab was not
stated and could not be identified. At the assessment of 77
laboratories, 30 achieved optimal marks (39 %), 27 good (35 %), 9 borderline (12
%) and 11 poor marks (14 %).
The following Abs were used:
mAb clone MI15 (Dako, n=36; NeoMarkers, n=2)
mAb clone B-B4 (Serotec, n=8; NeoMarkers, n=3; BeckmanCoulter,
n=1; IQ Products, n=1; Ventana, n=1)
mAb clone B-A38 (Ventana, n=5; Serotec, n=6; IQ Products, n=1;
Cell Marque, n=1)
mAb clone 5F7 (Novocastra, n=7; NeoMarkers, n=1)
mAb clone BC/B-B4 (BioCare, n=2; Abcam, n=1)
pAb RB-9422 (NeoMarkers, n=1)
Optimal staining for CD138 in this assessment was obtained with the
mAb clone MI15 (15 out of 37), mAb clone B-B4 (6 out
of 14), the mAb clone B-A38 (7 out of 13) and the mAb
BC/B-B4 (2 out of 3).
MI15: The protocols giving an optimal
result were all based on heat induced epitope retrieval (HIER) using
Tris-EDTA/EGTA pH 9 (9/18)*, Citrate pH 6 or pH 7 (3/5), Cell
Conditioning 1 (BenchMark, Ventana) (2/4), Cell Conditioning 2 (BenchMark,
Ventana) (1/1) or Target Retrieval Solution pH 6,1 (TRS, Dako) (2/4)
as the heating buffer. The mAb was typically diluted in the range of 1:25 –
1:100 depending on the total sensitivity of the protocol employed or
as a Ready-To-Use (RTU) antibody. Using these protocol settings 28 out of
32 (88 %) laboratories produced a sufficient staining (optimal or
good).
* (number of optimal results/number of
laboratories using this buffer).
B-B4: The protocols giving an optimal
result were all based on HIER using Tris-EDTA/EGTA pH 9 (3/5), Cell
Conditioning 1 (BenchMark, Ventana) (2/4) or Target Retrieval
Solution pH6,1 (TRS, Dako) (1/1) as the heating buffer. The Ab was diluted
in the range of 1:100 – 1:750 depending on the total sensitivity of
the protocol employed. Using these protocol settings 6 out of 6 (100
%) laboratories produced a sufficient staining, all marked as
optimal.
B-A38: The protocols giving an optimal
result were all based HIER using Tris-EDTA/EGTA pH 9 (4/4), Cell
Conditioning 1 (BenchMark, Ventana) (1/6), EDTA/EGTA pH8 (1/1) or
Bond Epitope Retrieval Solution 2 (Bond, Vision Biosystems) (1/1) as
the heating buffer. The Ab was diluted in the range of 1:100 – 1:3,000
depending on the total sensitivity of the protocol employed or as a
RTU antibody. Using these protocol settings 9 out of 12
(75%) laboratories produced a sufficient staining (optimal or good).
BC/B-B4: The protocols giving an optimal
result were all based on HIER using Tris-EDTA/EGTA pH 9 (1/2) or 1mM
EDTA pH 9 (1/1) as the heating buffer. The Ab was diluted 1:200. Using
these protocol settings both of 2 laboratories produced a
sufficient staining, both marked as optimal.
The most frequent causes of insufficient staining were:
- Less successful primary antibody
- Too low concentration of the primary antibody
In this assessment the prevalent feature of an insufficient staining
was either a too weak general staining or a complete false negative
reaction of the structures supposed to be demonstrated.
A
general weak staining was characterized by a diffuse staining of
both the ABCL diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and the ovarian serous
carcinoma, whereas the plasmacytoma was demonstrated. This staining
pattern was typically seen when using one of the clones otherwise
capable to give a sufficient result, but was used in a too dilute
titter or with a too low sensitivity in the protocol employed.
A complete false negative reaction was seen when using the clone 5F7
(all 8 out of 8 laboratories achieved poor marks). Neither the plasmacytoma nor the ovarian
serous carcinoma were stained in spite of the 5F7 protocols otherwise
being similar to protocols giving optimal results
with other clones. The staining pattern of the clone 5F7 was
entirely different, as 5F7 demonstrated a cytoplasmic component in plasma
cells and the epithelial cells showed a faint predominantly
cytoplasmic granular reaction.
Tonsil is an appropriate control: The late stage
activated B-cells in the germinal centres and the plasma cells should show a distinct
membranous staining, whereas other lymphocytes should be negative. The squamous
epithelial cells should show a strong membranous reaction.
Conclusion
The mAb clones
MI15, B-B4, B-A38 and BC/B-B4 were all
useful for the demonstration of CD138.
HIER is mandatory to obtain an optimal result. Concentration of the
primary Ab should be carefully calibrated.
Tonsil is an appropriate control: The late stage activated
germinal centre B-cells, plasma cells and squamous epithelial cells
must show a distinct membranous reaction. |