The
slide to be stained for
CK19
comprised:
1. Thyroid gland, 2. Appendix, 3. Esophagus, 4. Papillary thyroid
carcinoma,
5 & 6. Pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinomas
All tissues were fixed in 10 % neutral buffered formalin.
Criteria for assessing a CK19 staining as optimal included:
- A strong, distinct cytoplasmic staining
reaction of virtually all the appendiceal surface epithelial
cells, and at least a weak to moderate staining reaction of the
epithelial cells in the basal part of the crypts
- A strong cytoplasmic staining reaction of
the majority of the basal squamous epithelial cells in the
esophagus and a weak to moderate staining reaction of scattered
intermediate epithelial cells (some variation in the staining
pattern between the levels was seen in the cores from the same
donor block used for the multi-tissue array)
- At maximum a weak to moderate staining
reaction in scattered epithelial cells in the thyroid gland.
- A moderate to strong, distinct staining
reaction of virtually all the neoplastic cells of the papillary
thyroid carcinoma and the pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma
no. 5, and an at least a weak to moderate dot-like staining
reaction of the majority of the neoplastic cells in the
pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma no. 6.
147 laboratories participated in this
assessment. 46 % achieved a sufficient mark. In table 1 the
antibodies (Abs) used and marks are summarized.
Table 1.
Abs and
assessment marks
for CK19, run 34
|
Concentrated Abs |
N |
Vendor |
Optimal |
Good |
Borderl. |
Poor |
Suff.1 |
Suff. OPS2 |
mAb clone
A53-B/A2.26 |
6
6
1
1
1 |
Cell Marque
Thermo/NeoMarkers
DBS
IDLabs
Zytomed |
4 |
5 |
5 |
1 |
60 % |
86 % |
|
mAb clone
BA17 |
3
1 |
Thermo/NeoMarkers
Master Diagnostica |
3 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
- |
- |
|
mAb clone
b170 |
7 |
Leica/Novocastra |
5 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
100 % |
100 % |
|
mAb clone
K19.2 |
1 |
Thermo/NeoMarkers* |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
- |
- |
|
mAb clone
Ks19.1 |
4 |
Biocare |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
- |
- |
|
mAb
RCK108 |
61
3
1
1
1
1 |
Dako
Biogenex
Abcam
Eurodiagnostica
EuroProxima
Thermo/NeoMarkers |
7 |
16 |
24 |
21 |
34 % |
57 % |
|
rmAb
EP72 |
1 |
Epitomics |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
- |
- |
|
pAb
RB-9021 |
1 |
Thermo/NeoMarkers |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
- |
- |
|
Ready-To-Use Abs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mAb clone
A53-B/A2.26
760-4281 |
17 |
Ventana/Cell Marque |
6 |
6 |
3 |
2 |
71 % |
90 % |
mAb clone
A53-B/A2.26
319M-17 |
1 |
Cell Marque |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
- |
- |
mAb clone
A53-B/A2.26
ZM-0074 |
1 |
Zhongshan |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
- |
- |
mAb clone
b170
PA0799 |
3 |
Leica |
0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
- |
- |
mAb clone
Ks19.1
PM242 |
1 |
Biocare |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
- |
- |
mAb clone
RCK108
IS/IR615 |
22 |
Dako |
2 |
3 |
12 |
5 |
23 % |
50 % |
mAb clone
RCK108
MS-1902-R7 |
1 |
Thermo/NeoMarkers |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
- |
- |
|
Total |
147 |
|
30 |
38 |
46 |
33 |
- |
|
|
Proportion |
|
|
22 % |
26 % |
31 % |
23 % |
46 % |
|
1) Proportion of sufficient stains
(optimal or good), 2) Proportion of sufficient stains with optimal
protocol settings only, see below.
* Product has been discontinued by the vendor
The following central protocol parameters were used to obtain an
optimal staining:
Concentrated Abs
mAb clone A53-B/A2.26: The protocols giving an optimal result were
all based on heat induced epitope retrieval (HIER) using either Cell
Conditioning 1 (CC1, BenchMark, Ventana) (3/9)* or Tris-EDTA/EGTA pH
9 (1/3) as the retrieval buffer. The mAb was typically diluted in
the range of 1:25-1:200 depending on the total sensitivity of the
protocol employed. Using these protocol settings 6 out of 7 (86 %)
laboratories produced a sufficient staining (optimal or good).
* (number of optimal results/number of laboratories using this
buffer)
mAb clone BA17: The protocols giving an optimal result were all
based on HIER using either CC1 (BenchMark, Ventana) (1/1), EDTA/EGTA
pH 8 (1/1) or Citrate pH 6 (1/1) as the retrieval buffer. The mAb
was typically diluted in the range of 1:50-1:200 depending on the
total sensitivity of the protocol employed. Using these protocol
settings 3 out of 3 (100 %) laboratories produced a sufficient
staining.
mAb clone b170: The protocols giving an optimal result were all
based on HIER using either Bond Epitope Retrieval Solution 2 (BERS
2, Bond, Leica) (4/5) or CC1 (BenchMark, Ventana) (1/1) as the
retrieval buffer. The mAb was typically diluted in the range of
1:50-1:200 depending on the total sensitivity of the protocol
employed. Using these protocol settings 6 out of 6 (100 %)
laboratories produced a sufficient staining.
mAb clone Ks19.1:The protocols giving an optimal result were both
based on HIER using either BERS 2 (Bond, Leica) (1/1) or Borg
Decloaker pH 9.5 (Biocare) (1/1) as the retrieval buffer. The mAb
was diluted in the range of 1:100-1:200 depending on the total
sensitivity of the protocol employed. Using these protocol settings
2 out of 2 (100 %) laboratories produced a sufficient staining.
mAb clone RCK108: The protocols giving an optimal result were all
based on HIER using either Target Retrieval Solution pH 9 (3-in-1) (TRS
pH 9, Dako) (2/13), BERS 2 (Bond, Leica) (1/7), Borg Decloaker pH
9.5 (Biocare) (1/1), Tris-EDTA/EGTA pH 9 (2/10) or Citrate pH 6.7
(1/1) as the retrieval buffer. The mAb was typically diluted in the
range of 1:25-1:100 depending on the total sensitivity of the
protocol employed. Using these protocol settings 16 out of 28 (57 %)
laboratories produced a sufficient staining.
rmAb clone EP72: The protocol giving an optimal result was based on HIER using Citrate pH 6 as the retrieval buffer. The mAb was diluted
1:100.
Ready-To-Use Abs
mAb clone A53-B/A2.26 (prod. no. 760-4281 Ventana/Cell Marque): The
protocols giving an optimal result were typically based on HIER in
CC1 (BenchMark, Ventana) mild or standard, an incubation time of
24-32 min in the primary Ab and UltraView (760-500) with or without
amplification kit or OptiView as the detection system. Using these
protocol settings 9 out of 10 (90 %) laboratories produced a
sufficient staining.
mAb clone RCK108 (prod. no. IS/IR615, Dako): The protocols giving an
optimal result were all based on HIER in PT-Link (heating time for
20 min at 97°C) using TRS pH 9 (3-in-1) or TRS pH 9 as the HIER
buffer, an incubation time of 20 min in the primary Ab and EnVision
Flex/Flex+(K8000K8002) as the detection system. Using these protocol
settings 4 out of 8 (50 %) laboratories produced a sufficient
staining.
The most frequent causes of insufficient stains were:
- Too low concentration of the primary Ab
- Less successful performance of the primary mAb clone RCK108
- Inappropriate epitope retrieval - use of proteolytic pre-treatment
or omission of pre-treatment
In this assessment and in concordance with the previous NordiQC
assessment for CK19, run 29 2010, the prevalent feature of an
insufficient staining was a too weak or false negative reaction of
the cells expected to be demonstrated. This was seen in 97 % of the
insufficient results (77 out of 79). In the remaining 3 % a false
positive staining and an impaired morphology was seen.
The majority of laboratories were able to demonstrate CK19 in high
antigen expressing structures such as the luminal columnar
epithelial cells of the appendix and the neoplastic cells of the
pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma no. 5, whereas the demonstration
of CK19 in the basal columnar epithelial cells of the appendix, the
epithelial cells of the esophagus, the pancreatic neuroendocrine
carcinoma no. 6 and the papillary thyroid carcinoma expressing less
CK19 was much more challenging and required an optimally calibrated
protocol.
Several antibodies could be used to obtain an optimal staining
result. In general an efficient HIER in an alkaline buffer and a
carefully calibrated Ab titre were the main parameters to provide an
optimal staining.
The use of proteolytic pre-treatment was found to give suboptimal
results, as 14 out of 17 protocols based on proteolysis were
assessed as insufficient and none gave an optimal result. This was
seen for all the antibodies used.
In this context it has to be stressed that the data sheets from many
vendors for the Abs for CK19 give imprecise
or misleading guidelines concerning the epitope retrieval and protocol set-up for
the antibodies. E.g., the protocol recommended by Dako (the most
used vendor) for the mAb clone RCK108 as a concentrate is based on
proteolytic pre-treatment, whereas HIER is recommended when the
clone is sold as a Ready-To-Use (RTU) format from same vendor! The
mAb clones B170, Leica/Novocastra and Ks19.1, Biocare could both
give an optimal result providing that HIER was performed and not
proteolytic pre-treatment as recommended in the data sheets from
these vendors. In addition, the data sheets for these two clones
suggest skin to be used as positive control for CK19, which cannot
be recommended to validate the IHC performance for this antibody.
CK19 is not expressed in keratinizing epithelial cells and the
content of sweat glands hair follicles expressing Ck19 is highly
varying complicating the interpretation.
The most widely used mAb clone RCK108 as a concentrate gave a very
low pass rate of 37 % and even with optimal protocol settings -
appropriate titre of the mAb and pre-treatment settings, only a
modest improvement to 57 % was seen. Use of a 2-step polymer or multimer based detection system as e.g., EnVision Flex, Dako or
UltraView, Ventana gave a significantly lower pass rate of 21 %,
compared to 50 % when a more sensitive 3-step polymer or multimer
based detection system such as, e.g., EnVision Flex+, Bond Refine (Leica)
or UltraView + amplification was used. With the same clone as
Ready-To-Use format, Dako, an even lower overall pass rate was seen.
These results clearly indicate that the mAb clone RCK108 is less
robust for the demonstration of CK19 compared to the mAb clones
A53-B/A2.26, BA17, b170 and Ks19.1, all giving a pass rate of 90-100
% when used with optimal protocol settings as described above and
similar as applied for the mAb clone RCK108.
As positive control for CK19, the combination of esophagus and
appendix was found to be most reliable as critical stain quality
indicators for CK19. In the optimal protocols virtually all the
basal epithelial cells in these two tissues showed a moderate to
strong distinct cytoplasmic staining reaction.
In the insufficient results deemed too weak the basal cells only
showed an equivocal or totally negative staining reaction.
In the optimal protocols a distinct positive staining reaction was
seen in scattered epithelial cells of the normal thyroid epithelial
cells. However, the staining intensity and proportion of positive
cells was significantly lower than those of the thyroid carcinoma.
This was the 2nd assessment of CK19 in NordiQC (Table 2), and in
this run a significantly lower pass rate was seen compared to the
previous run in 2010.
Table 2:
Proportion of sufficient results for CK19 in the two NordiQC runs
performed
| |
Run 29 2010 |
Run 34 2012 |
|
Participants, n= |
109 |
147 |
|
Sufficient results |
69 % |
46 % |
In this assessment for CK19 many new laboratories participated for
the first time and for these a lower pass rate was observed compared
to the laboratories also participating in the previous run 29, 2010:
For the laboratories participating for the first time the pass rate
was 35 % (17 out of 48), whereas the pass rate was 52 % (51 out of
99) for the laboratories participating in both runs. This indicate
that the combination of many new participants and a more challenging
tissue block circulated most likely caused the lower pass rate in
this run for CK19.
Conclusion
The mAb clones A53-B/A2.26, b170, BA17 and Ks19.1 were in this
assessment the most robust Abs for CK19. mAb RCK108 can neither be
recommended as a concentrate or in a RTU system (Dako). For all clones HIER should
be used for an optimal performance. Appendix and esophagus are recommended positive controls for CK19: In the esophagus the basal
squamous epithelial cells as well as scattered intermediate cells
must show a distinct cytoplasmic staining reaction and in the
appendix the basal columnar epithelial cells must show an at least
weak to moderate staining reaction. |