CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02855281Updated Mar 5, 2021Results posted

Sensitivity of PDL-1-analysis From Pleural Effusion in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

An observational study in Lung Neoplasms, sponsored by Wissenschaftliches Institut Bethanien e.V. Completed at 1 site in Germany. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-03-05.

Sponsored by Wissenschaftliches Institut Bethanien e.V · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Case-only
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
50
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This is a prospective diagnostic pilot study to create hypotheses regarding immunocytochemistry (ICC) PD-L1 analysis of pleural effusions in NSCLC patients as compared to the reference standard of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC). This comparison will be done to assess sensitivity and specificity of PD-L1 detection by ICC in pleural effusions.

02

Conditions studied

  • Lung Neoplasms
03

In context

Lung Neoplasms

7,243 studies on the registry are indexed under Lung Neoplasms; 1,558 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 50 is below the median of 189 across 1,512 observational studies indexed under Lung Neoplasms.

Browse Lung Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

Wissenschaftliches Institut Bethanien e.V is the lead sponsor of 25 studies on the registry; 2 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

The population for selection of potential study participants is comprised of clinical routine patients presenting with (suspected malignant) pleural effusion. These patients must have an indication for pleural puncture. The cause and nature of the pleural effusion at this time point will be unknown in many cases. To establish this, further diagnostic procedures are required. Only patients with confirmed diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer will be included in the data analysis.

A patient in whom suspicion of pleural manifestation of lung cancer is not confirmed, will be considered a screening failure and thus excluded from the study.

Inclusion criteria

  • Presence of malignant pleural effusion with indication for pleural puncture and thoracoscopy
  • Confirmed diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer according to ERS guidelines
  • Written informed consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Pregnancy and/or lactation
  • Acute and life-threatening illness (instable angina pectoris, acute pulmonary arterial embolism, myocardial infarction, etc.)
  • Any contraindication to undergo thoracoscopy (e.g. anticoagulation therapy which cannot be discontinued for the procedure)
  • Any medical, psychological or other condition impairing the patient's ability to provide informed consent
05

Study design

Observational model
Case-only
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
50 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • NSCLC with pleural effusion

    The population for selection of potential study participants is comprised of clinical routine patients presenting with (suspected malignant) pleural effusion. These patients must have an indication for pleural puncture. The cause and nature of the pleural effusion at this time point will be unknown in many cases. To establish this, further diagnostic procedures are required. Only patients with confirmed diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer will be included in the data analysis.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. PD-L1 Prevalence IHC

    Number/prevalence of PD-L1-positive patients according to immunohistochemistry (IHC) of pleural biopsy.

    Time frame: At baseline

  2. PD-L1 Prevalence ICC

    Number/prevalence of PD-L1-positive patients according to immunocytochemistry (ICC) of pleural aspirate

    Time frame: At baseline

  3. PD-L1 Detection in Pleural Effusion Based on All Cases With Successful PD-L1 Analysis

    Based on all cases where PD-L1 analysis was indicated and sucessful (i.e. giving definite results), the immunocytochemistry analysis of PE was compared with the immunohistochemistry analysis of pleural tissue.Two different alternatives were calculated: * PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥50% was defined as PD-L1-positive. * PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥1% was defined as PD-L1-positive.

    Time frame: At baseline

Secondary outcomes

  1. PD-L1 Detection in Pleural Effusion Based on All Cases With Indication for PD-L1 Analysis

    Based on all cases where PD-L1 analysis was indicated, the immunocytochemistry analysis of PE was compared with the immunohistochemistry analysis of pleural tissue.Two different alternatives were calculated: * PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥50% was defined as PD-L1-positive. * PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥1% was defined as PD-L1-positive. In both instances, cases where PD-L1 analysis could not be performed were defined as negative.

    Time frame: At baseline

  2. Tumor Cell Detection in Pleural Effusion

    Comparing the immunocytochemistry (ICC) analysis of pleural effusion concerning the detection of malignant tumor cells as compared to the immunohistochemistry analysis of pleural tissue. Seven cases of ICC analysis with inconclusive results were defined as negative.

    Time frame: At baseline

07

Results

Posted Mar 5, 2021
Limitations and caveats
The fact that the PE did not always yield enough material for a comprehensive immunocytochemistry evaluation including PD-L1 analysis, constitutes an important limitation, in part leading to inconclusive results regarding malignancy. This may be due to a low rate of cells scaling off from the pleural lesion and/or a low rate of migration of tumor cells into the pleural fluid.

Participant flow

Clinical routine patients presenting with (suspected malignant) pleural effusion and indication for pleural puncture were considered for enrollment. Patients with confirmed malignancy of pleural effusion were actually enrolled.

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneMalignant Pleural Effusion
Started50
Completed50
Not completed0

Outcome measures

PrimaryPD-L1 Prevalence IHC

Number/prevalence of PD-L1-positive patients according to immunohistochemistry (IHC) of pleural biopsy.

Time frame:
At baseline
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
PD-L1 Prevalence IHC
ParticipantsNumber of PD-L1-positive Samples in IHC
PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥ 1% was defined as PD-L1-positive — PD-L1 positive21
PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥ 1% was defined as PD-L1-positive — PD-L1 negative14
PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥ 50% was defined as PD-L1-positive — PD-L1 positive8
PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥ 50% was defined as PD-L1-positive — PD-L1 negative27
PrimaryPD-L1 Prevalence ICC

Number/prevalence of PD-L1-positive patients according to immunocytochemistry (ICC) of pleural aspirate

Time frame:
At baseline
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
PD-L1 Prevalence ICC
ParticipantsNumber of PD-L1-positive Samples in ICC
PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥ 1% was defined as PD-L1-positive — PD-L1 positive19
PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥ 1% was defined as PD-L1-positive — PD-L1 negative6
PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥ 50% was defined as PD-L1-positive — PD-L1 positive13
PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥ 50% was defined as PD-L1-positive — PD-L1 negative12
PrimaryPD-L1 Detection in Pleural Effusion Based on All Cases With Successful PD-L1 Analysis

Based on all cases where PD-L1 analysis was indicated and sucessful (i.e. giving definite results), the immunocytochemistry analysis of PE was compared with the immunohistochemistry analysis of pleural tissue.Two different alternatives were calculated: * PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥50% was defined as PD-L1-positive. * PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥1% was defined as PD-L1-positive.

Time frame:
At baseline
Reported as:
Number · percent
PD-L1 Detection in Pleural Effusion Based on All Cases With Successful PD-L1 Analysis
percentSensitivity and Specificity of PD-L1 Detection in Pleural Effusion (TPS ≥50%)Sensitivity and Specificity of PD-L1 Detection in Pleural Effusion (TPS ≥1%)
Sensitivity100 (46 to 100)86 (56 to 97)
Specificity63 (36 to 84)43 (12 to 80)
positive predictive value45 (18 to 75)75 (47 to 92)
negative predictive value100 (66 to 100)60 (17 to 93)
SecondaryPD-L1 Detection in Pleural Effusion Based on All Cases With Indication for PD-L1 Analysis

Based on all cases where PD-L1 analysis was indicated, the immunocytochemistry analysis of PE was compared with the immunohistochemistry analysis of pleural tissue.Two different alternatives were calculated: * PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥50% was defined as PD-L1-positive. * PD-L1 expression with a TPS ≥1% was defined as PD-L1-positive. In both instances, cases where PD-L1 analysis could not be performed were defined as negative.

Time frame:
At baseline
Reported as:
Number · percent
PD-L1 Detection in Pleural Effusion Based on All Cases With Indication for PD-L1 Analysis
percentSensitivity and Specificity of PD-L1 Detection in Pleural Effusion (TPS ≥50%)Sensitivity and Specificity of PD-L1 Detection in Pleural Effusion (TPS ≥1%)
Sensitivity71 (30 to 95)71 (44 to 89)
Specificity71 (49 to 87)64 (36 to 86)
positive predictive value42 (16 to 71)71 (44 to 89)
negative predictive value89 (65 to 98)64 (36 to 86)
SecondaryTumor Cell Detection in Pleural Effusion

Comparing the immunocytochemistry (ICC) analysis of pleural effusion concerning the detection of malignant tumor cells as compared to the immunohistochemistry analysis of pleural tissue. Seven cases of ICC analysis with inconclusive results were defined as negative.

Time frame:
At baseline
Reported as:
Number · percent
Tumor Cell Detection in Pleural Effusion
percentSensitivity and Specificity of Tumor Cell Detection
Sensitivity83 (67 to 89)
Specificity70 (35 to 92)
positive predictive value92 (76 to 98)
negative predictive value50 (24 to 76)

Adverse events

Collected over 1 day. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
NSCLC With Pleural Effusion0/50 (0%)0/50 (0%)0/50 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

patients with confirmed diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Malignant Pleural Effusion
Median72.5 (62.8 to 76.3)
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Malignant Pleural Effusion
Female17
Male33
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants)Malignant Pleural Effusion
American Indian or Alaska Native0
Asian0
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander0
Black or African American0
White0
More than one race0
Unknown or Not Reported50
BMI
BMI(kg/m2)Malignant Pleural Effusion
Median25.7 (23.2 to 28.5)
smoking status
smoking status(Participants)Malignant Pleural Effusion
never7
ex-smoker28
current smoker15
Histology Type
Histology Type(Participants)Malignant Pleural Effusion
NSCLC - Adeno carcinoma33
NSCLC - Squamous cell carcinoma7
NSCLC - large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma1
SCLC4
SCLC + Adeno carcinoma1
Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma1
Sarcomatoid Mesothelioma1
Ambiguous histology2
Cancer Stage (UICC 8th ed.)
Cancer Stage (UICC 8th ed.)(Participants)Malignant Pleural Effusion
IA21
IB1
IIB3
IIIA2
IIIB2
IVA24
IVB15
Unknown1
III-IV (IMIG classification)1
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Wissenschaftliches Institut Bethanien e. V.
    Solingen, NRW 42699, Germany
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Hagmeyer L, Schafer S, Engels M, Pietzke-Calcagnile A, Treml M, Herkenrath SD, Heldwein M, Hekmat K, Matthes S, Scheel A, Wolf J, Buttner R, Randerath W. High sensitivity of PD-L1 analysis from pleural effusion in nonsmall cell lung cancer. ERJ Open Res. 2021 Mar 22;7(1):00787-2020. doi: 10.1183/23120541.00787-2020. eCollection 2021 Jan. PubMed 33778051 ↗

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Nov 4, 2016

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 5, 2021, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02855281
Lead sponsor
Wissenschaftliches Institut Bethanien e.V
Collaborators
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Aug 4, 2016
Start date
Oct 2016
Primary completion
Dec 2018
Completion
Dec 2018
Results posted
Mar 5, 2021
Last update
Mar 5, 2021

Study contacts

Winfried J Randerath, Prof. Dr.
principal investigator · Wissenschaftliches Institut Bethanien e.V

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion