Estrogen Receptor, Progesterone Receptor, and Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Expression Rates in Invasive Breast Carcinoma: A Study of 21 Institutions.

CONTEXT.­: Laboratories performing predictive marker testing for breast carcinoma are encouraged to compare patient results to published benchmarks. OBJECTIVE.­: To collect expression rates for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) in invasive breast carcinoma from multiple laboratories. DESIGN.­: Participants submitted data from up to 50 primary cases during the study period. Participants reported ER, PgR, and HER2 results in addition to demographic and histologic information. Participants also provided annual institution-level expression rates. RESULTS.­: A total of 21 institutions submitted data for 687 cases. Aggregate positivity rates for ER and PgR were 85.6% and 75.1%, respectively. Receptor positivity rates were higher in well-differentiated (grade 1) tumors (ER, 97.4%; PgR, 88.0%) compared with moderately differentiated (grade 2) tumors (ER, 92.4%; PgR, 84.0%) and poorly differentiated (grade 3) tumors (ER, 61.8%; PgR, 48.0%). Expression rates were higher in postmenopausal women (ER, 87.2%) than premenopausal women (ER, 79.6%) and higher in lobular carcinomas (ER, 98.7%; PgR, 85.3%) than ductal carcinomas (ER, 84.1%; PgR, 74.5%). The aggregate HER2 positivity (score 3+) rate was 9.0%. The aggregate HER2 equivocal (score 2+) rate was 14.5%. Of 81 equivocal (score 2+) cases, 70 (86.4%) were nonamplified. CONCLUSIONS.­: The data from this study provide multi-institutional benchmark data to assist laboratories performing periodic comparisons as part of a quality management program. Overall expression rates were generally similar to those of other published reports, with the exception of the ER-negative and HER2-positive rates, both of which were somewhat lower.

Preanalytic Competency Assessment: A Q-Probes Study Involving 46 Health Care Institutions, 447 Blood Collectors/Phlebotomists, and 2212 Individual Assessments.

CONTEXT.­: Health care organizations face a challenge of assessing preanalytic competency of blood collectors/phlebotomists (BC/Ps). OBJECTIVE.­: To pilot a novel methodology for BC/P preanalytic competency assessment and identify potential areas for improvement. DESIGN.­: Study participants identified preanalytic errors present in 5 blood collection video vignettes. Submitted error descriptions were categorized and then consolidated into a list of standardized required errors for evaluation. RESULTS.­: The correct identification of required error rates across all videos viewed by 447 BC/Ps from 46 institutions ranged from 0.7% to 91.9%. The median phlebotomist score across all 5 videos was 55.9% for 440 eligible blood collectors and ranged between 38.2% (10th percentile) and 70.6% (90th percentile). The median institutional score from 42 eligible institutions was 55.9% (range, 43.3%-65.3% for the 10th to 90th percentiles). There were no significant associations between any laboratory practice characteristics and the institutional average overall phlebotomist scores. The following phlebotomist characteristics were significantly associated with overall phlebotomist scores: level of education (P = .01), having phlebotomy technician (American Society for Clinical Pathology) certification compared with no or other certifications (P = .002), years of experience in collecting blood specimens (P = .01), and higher average number of venipuncture specimens collected per shift (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS.­: Improvement of the awareness and knowledge of correct blood collection practices is needed, because the best performers (90th percentile) did not recognize approximately one-third of the errors. Using hypothetical blood collection scenarios that incorporate performance errors may be a way to assess preanalytic competency of BC/Ps and create opportunities for continuous improvement.

Technical Staffing Ratios.

CONTEXT.­: Laboratory managers and medical directors are charged with staffing their clinical laboratories as efficiently as possible. OBJECTIVE.­: To report and analyze the results of 3 College of American Pathologists Q-Probes studies that surveyed the normative rates of laboratory technical staffing ratios. DESIGN.­: Participants in the College of American Pathologists Q-Probes program submitted data on the levels of staffing and test volumes performed in their laboratories in 2014, 2016, and 2019. From these data, we calculated departmental productivity ratios, defined as testing volume per full-time equivalent, and degrees of managerial oversight, defined as the ratio of nonmanagement to management full-time equivalents. Participants completed general questionnaires surveying their hospital and laboratory demographics and practices, the data from which we determined demographic and practice characteristics that were significantly associated with technical staffing ratios. RESULTS.­: Sixty-seven, 82, and 79 institutions submitted data for the years 2019, 2016, and 2014, respectively. Technical staffing ratios varied widely among the various laboratory departments within each institution and among different institutions participating in this study. With the exception of cytology departments, productivity and managerial oversight ratios did not significantly change between these 3 studies. In the 2019 study, greater testing volumes were associated with higher productivity ratios. Significant associations between managerial oversight ratios and practice characteristics were not consistent across the 3 studies. CONCLUSIONS.­: Technical staffing ratios varied widely among the various laboratory departments within each institution and among different institutions participating in this study.