<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><submitter>Amemiya K</submitter><funding>a Research Grant for Young Scholars</funding><funding>a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B)</funding><funding>Grant-in-Aid for the Genome Research Project from Yamanashi Prefecture</funding><funding>The Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) KAKENHI Early-Career Scientists</funding><funding>Grant-in-Aid for research from the Charitable Trust Laboratory Medicine Research Foundation of Japan</funding><funding>Medical Research Grants from the Takeda Science Foundation</funding><funding>Grant-in-Aid for research from the Japanese Society of Clinical Cytology</funding><funding>Uehara Memorial Foundation</funding><funding>The Kurozumi Medical Foundation</funding><funding>the Uehara Memorial Foundation</funding><funding>the YASUDA Medical Foundation</funding><pubmed_abstract>Evaluation of the status of mismatch repair (MMR) in tumors is crucial for determining the application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Conventional PCR (MSI-PCR) is the gold standard for confirming the MMR status. However, it requires visual confirmation and presents difficulties in determining MMR status. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a simple method and can confirming MMR protein expression in the whole tumor. We aim to investigate IHC is more suitable for evaluating MMR status in the tumor. We compared MSI-PCR and IHC by testing 319 samples from 284 patients across 14 cancer types. In discordant cases, we performed laser-capture microdissection and microsatellite instability assay by next-generation sequencing (MSI-NGS). The concordance rate between IHC and MSI-PCR testing was 98.1% (313/319). Two reasons for these discrepancies were ambiguous MSI-PCR results and heterogeneous MSI status within the tumor. Among six cases (1.9%), three were judged as MSI-H by MSI-PCR but with proficient MMR by IHC. The results of MSI-NGS revealed microsatellite stable in these three cases. The remaining three cases, two of three were MSI-H and one was MSS in whole tumor in MSI-PCR. IHC showed a "mosaic" pattern containing both proficient MMR and deficient MMR portions by IHC in all three cases. We performed microdissection and MSI-PCR and found intratumoral heterogeneity of MMR status. These results indicated the advantages of IHC and performed expanded samples (n = 1082) and two additional mosaic cases were identified. Our results clearly indicated that simple IHC is the best choice for determining MMR alterations in critical cases for ICIs treatment.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Cancer medicine</journal><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC9741978</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Simple IHC reveals complex MMR alternations than PCR assays: Validation by LCM and next-generation sequencing.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC9741978</pmcid><funding_grant_id>JP18K16292</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>20H03668</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Mochizuki H</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hirotsu Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Watanabe S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kondo T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Nagakubo Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Omata M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Amemiya S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Amemiya K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Oyama T</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Simple IHC reveals complex MMR alternations than PCR assays: Validation by LCM and next-generation sequencing.</name><description>Evaluation of the status of mismatch repair (MMR) in tumors is crucial for determining the application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Conventional PCR (MSI-PCR) is the gold standard for confirming the MMR status. However, it requires visual confirmation and presents difficulties in determining MMR status. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a simple method and can confirming MMR protein expression in the whole tumor. We aim to investigate IHC is more suitable for evaluating MMR status in the tumor. We compared MSI-PCR and IHC by testing 319 samples from 284 patients across 14 cancer types. In discordant cases, we performed laser-capture microdissection and microsatellite instability assay by next-generation sequencing (MSI-NGS). The concordance rate between IHC and MSI-PCR testing was 98.1% (313/319). Two reasons for these discrepancies were ambiguous MSI-PCR results and heterogeneous MSI status within the tumor. Among six cases (1.9%), three were judged as MSI-H by MSI-PCR but with proficient MMR by IHC. The results of MSI-NGS revealed microsatellite stable in these three cases. The remaining three cases, two of three were MSI-H and one was MSS in whole tumor in MSI-PCR. IHC showed a "mosaic" pattern containing both proficient MMR and deficient MMR portions by IHC in all three cases. We performed microdissection and MSI-PCR and found intratumoral heterogeneity of MMR status. These results indicated the advantages of IHC and performed expanded samples (n = 1082) and two additional mosaic cases were identified. Our results clearly indicated that simple IHC is the best choice for determining MMR alterations in critical cases for ICIs treatment.</description><dates><release>2022-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2022 May</publication><modification>2025-04-04T08:55:33.815Z</modification><creation>2025-04-04T08:55:33.815Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC9741978</accession><cross_references><pubmed>35596629</pubmed><doi>10.1002/cam4.4832</doi></cross_references></HashMap>