Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma: clinical follow-up and analysis of sequential pathologic specimens of untreated patients shows persistent or progressive disease.

Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) is a distinctive type of T-cell lymphoma that arises around textured-surface breast implants. In a subset of patients, this disease can involve surrounding tissues, spread to regional lymph nodes, and rarely metastasize to distant sites. The aim of this study was to assess sequential pathologic specimens from patients with breast implant-associated ALCL to better understand the natural history of early-stage disease. To achieve this goal, we searched our files for patients who had breast implant-associated ALCL and who had undergone earlier surgical intervention with assessment of biopsy or cytologic specimens. We then focused on the patient subset in whom a definitive diagnosis was not established, and patients did not receive current standard-of-care therapy at that time. We identified a study group of ten patients with breast implant-associated ALCL in whom pathologic specimens were collected 0.5 to 4 years before a definitive diagnosis was established. A comparison of these serial biopsy specimens showed persistent disease without change in pathologic stage in three patients, progression in five patients, and persistence versus progression in two patients. Eventually, six patients underwent implant removal with complete capsulectomy and four underwent partial capsulectomy. Seven patients also received chemotherapy because of invasive disease, three of whom also received radiation therapy, two brentuximab vedotin after chemotherapy failure, and one allogeneic stem cell transplant. Eight patients achieved complete remission and two had partial remission after definitive therapy. At time of last follow-up, six patients were alive without disease, one had evidence of disease, one died of disease, and two patients died of unrelated cancers. In summary, this analysis of sequential specimens from patients with breast implant-associated ALCL suggests these neoplasms persist or progress over time if not treated with standard-of-care therapy.

Preanalytics and Precision Pathology: Pathology Practices to Ensure Molecular Integrity of Cancer Patient Biospecimens for Precision Medicine.

Biospecimens acquired during routine medical practice are the primary sources of molecular information about patients and their diseases that underlies precision medicine and translational research. In cancer care, molecular analysis of biospecimens is especially common because it often determines treatment choices and may be used to monitor therapy in real time. However, patient specimens are collected, handled, and processed according to routine clinical procedures during which they are subjected to factors that may alter their molecular quality and composition. Such artefactual alteration may skew data from molecular analyses, render analysis data uninterpretable, or even preclude analysis altogether if the integrity of a specimen is severely compromised. As a result, patient care and safety may be affected, and medical research dependent on patient samples may be compromised. Despite these issues, there is currently no requirement to control or record preanalytical variables in clinical practice with the single exception of breast cancer tissue handled according to the guideline jointly developed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists (CAP) and enforced through the CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program. Recognizing the importance of molecular data derived from patient specimens, the CAP Personalized Healthcare Committee established the Preanalytics for Precision Medicine Project Team to develop a basic set of evidence-based recommendations for key preanalytics for tissue and blood specimens. If used for biospecimens from patients, these preanalytical recommendations would ensure the fitness of those specimens for molecular analysis and help to assure the quality and reliability of the analysis data.

Discrepancy in risk assessment of hormone receptor positive early-stage breast cancer patients using breast cancer index and recurrence score.

PURPOSE: A recent comparison of the prognostic accuracy of Breast Cancer Index (BCI) and the Recurrence Score (RS) showed that BCI was more precise than RS. BCI identified a subset of RS low and intermediate risk patients with clinically relevant elevated rates of distant recurrences (DR). The current study analyzed the correlation of BCI and RS risk classification to clinical and pathological parameters and further examined the re-categorization between the two risk group indices in a multi-institutional cohort of hormone receptor positive (HR+) breast cancer patients. METHODS: 560 women with HR+, lymph node-negative breast cancer who underwent testing with RS as part of their routine clinical care were included in the final analysis. Individual risk was assessed using predefined categories of RS and BCI (Low, Intermediate and High, respectively). Correlations between BCI, RS, and standard clinical-pathological prognostic factors were examined, and re-categorization of risk groups between BCI and RS was analyzed. RESULTS: An overall significant association between histological tumor grade and RS or BCI was observed with high-grade tumors more prevalent among RS and BCI high-risk patients. The invasive ductal carcinoma histologic subtype was associated with 98% and 93% of high-risk RS and BCI cases, respectively. The invasive lobular subtype accounted for 0% and 6% of high-risk RS and BCI cases, respectively. A poor agreement between the two biomarker risk group indices was demonstrated with more than 51% of the total cohort stratified differently between BCI and RS. As compared with RS, BCI stratified fewer patients into the intermediate-risk group (29% vs. 39%, BCI and RS, respectively) and more patients into the high-risk group (19% vs. 7%, BCI and RS, respectively). Subsets of both RS low- and intermediate-risk patients were identified by BCI as high risk. CONCLUSIONS: In this clinical series, BCI and RS risk groups demonstrated a significant association with histological tumor grade. BCI showed a modest correlation with tumor size and no correlation with age, while RS showed no correlation with tumor size or age. Compared with RS, BCI classifies fewer intermediate risk patients, identifies subsets of low and intermediate RS risk patients as high-risk, and provides distinct individualized risk assessment for patients with early-stage breast cancer.

"Please Help Me See the Dragon I Am Slaying": Implementation of a Novel Patient-Pathologist Consultation Program and Survey of Patient Experience.

CONTEXT.­: Pathologists evaluate human disease and teach medical students, residents, and clinicians. Historically recognized as the "doctor's doctor," pathologists are well suited to be a direct patient resource of individualized, accurate information. OBJECTIVE.­: To develop and implement a pathology consultation service whereby patients review their tissue slides directly with pathologists. DESIGN.­: A pathologist conducted patient consultations, reviewing biopsy or surgery findings on a multiheaded microscope or computer screen. The pathologist evaluated patients' understanding of their disease and invited patients to ask specific questions. We recorded patient demographic data and assessed utilization with a short patient satisfaction survey using 6 questions with a 5-point Likert scale and 2 questions for open response. RESULTS.­: A total of 31 patients came for consultation; 39% (12 of 31) were accompanied by a friend or family member. Patients' median age was 59 years, with a strong female predominance (90%; 28 of 31). The majority of patients had breast cancer (58%; 18 of 31) or hematologic malignancy (19%; 6 of 31). Of the 31 patients, the survey response rate was 58% (18 of 31). Top-box scoring demonstrated program support, with 89% (16 of 18) of respondents strongly recommending the experience to another patient. Additionally, 78% (14 of 18) strongly agreed that they felt more empowered after seeing their disease. Mean scores for Likert-based questions all were higher than 4.0. CONCLUSIONS.­: To our knowledge, this study is the first report of direct patient-pathologist consultation. Early data suggest that the program may provide effective patient-specific education. The high response rate and favorable assessment of the program suggest that it may be a valuable resource for some patients.