Percent Agreement Between Immunohistochemistry and Next-Generation Sequencing in Testing Patients for Mismatch Repair Deficiency. Applied immunohistochemistry & molecular morphology : AIMM Lawrence, L., Longacre, T., Saleem, A., Kunder, C. 2022


The presence of mismatch repair deficiency is frequently assessed in gastrointestinal and gynecologic neoplasms by surgical pathologists using immunohistochemical methods. Targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) covering some genes in the mismatch repair complex is used with increasing frequency, however, the percent positive and negative agreement of immunohistochemical methods and NGS of mismatch repair genes is not well-described in the literature. We sought to compare performance of immunohistochemistry (IHC) and NGS of mismatch repair genes on our institutional targeted panel. We evaluated the concordance of immunohistochemical and panel-based gene sequencing methods in a retrospective cohort study of patients evaluated at our center with both immunohistochemical and panel-based sequencing. Our NGS panel covers only MLH1 and MSH2, whereas our immunohistochemical panel assesses for expression of MLH1, PMS2, MSH2, and MSH6. We identified 68 unique patients with both immunohistochemical evaluation of mismatch repair protein expression and NGS panel sequencing, of which 67 were suitable for analysis given the patterns of immunohistochemical loss of expression observed. The percent positive agreement for NGS with IHC was 50%, albeit with very rare positive cases (n=2/4). Percent negative agreement was also high at 100% (n=63/63). One case with loss of MLH1, PMS2, and MSH6 expression by IHC and no pathogenic variants by NGS exhibited MLH1 promoter hypermethylation. Percent negative agreement between immunohistochemical and NGS gene sequencing is high, although firm conclusions regarding percent positive agreement between NGS and IHC are limited by low numbers of positive cases in our cohort. In general, we consider the findings to support continued use of immunohistochemical methods to screen for the presence of mismatch repair deficiency and consider additional testing by NGS likely to add little diagnostic value in the context of intact immunohistochemical expression of mismatch repair proteins.

View details for DOI 10.1097/PAI.0000000000001018

View details for PubMedID 35285457