Current State of Cytologic-Histologic Correlation Implementation for North American and International Laboratories: Results of the College of American Pathologists Cytopathology Committee Laboratory Practices in Gynecologic Cytology Survey.

CONTEXT.­: The College of American Pathologists (CAP) updated the Laboratory Accreditation Program Cytopathology Checklist to assist laboratories in meeting and exceeding the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments standards for gynecologic cytologic-histologic correlation (CHC). OBJECTIVE.­: To survey the current CHC practices. DESIGN.­: Data were analyzed from a survey developed by the committee and distributed to participants in the CAP Gynecologic Cytopathology PAP Education Program mailing. RESULTS.­: Worldwide, CHC practice is nearly universally adopted, with an overall rate of 87.0% (568 of 653). CHC material was highly accessible. CHC was commonly performed real time/concurrently at the time the corresponding surgical pathology was reviewed. Investigation of CHC discordances varied with North American laboratories usually having a single pathologist review all discrepant histology and cytology slides to determine the reason for discordance, while international laboratories have a second pathologist review histology slides to determine the reason for discordance. The cause of CHC discordance was primarily sampling issues. The more common statistical metrics for CHC monitoring were the total percentage of cases that correlated with subsequent biopsies, screening error rate by cytotechnologist, and interpretative error rate by cytotechnologist. CONCLUSIONS.­: Many laboratories have adopted and implemented the CHC guidelines with identifiable differences in practices between North American and international laboratories. We identify the commonalities and differences between North American and international institutional practices including where CHC is performed, how CHC cases are identified and their accessibility, when CHC is performed, who investigates discordances, what discordances are identified, and how the findings affect quality improvement.

Cutaneous deciduosis: a report of two cases of an unusual pseudomalignancy.

Cutaneous deciduosis represents a rare manifestation of cutaneous endometriosis in which typical endometrial glands and stroma are morphologically and physiologically transformed under hormonal influence. The transformed glands and stroma usually take on the microscopic appearance of uterine decidua but may mimic malignancy. We describe two cases of cutaneous deciduosis that presented in the post-partum period, but biopsies were not performed until a much later date. The first lesion arose on the perineum of a 31-year-old female after vaginal delivery, but a biopsy was not performed until 6 years after presentation. The second lesion grew in a cesarean section scar of a 26-year-old female with a history of ovarian adnexal endometriosis. Clinically described as a persistent post-operative hematoma, the lesion throbbed in synchrony with her menstrual cycles; a biopsy was also performed 6 years after presentation. Histopathologically, both specimens showed similar findings. Sections showed a multinodular proliferation of pale-staining epithelioid cells without significant nuclear atypia or conspicuous mitotic figures. Both showed focal glands that ranged from slit-like to slightly dilated and that contained a flattened epithelial lining without atypia. These unusual cases are presented to instruct about the pathologic findings of this entity in order to prevent the unnecessary diagnosis of malignancy.

Breast Fine-Needle Aspiration Practice in 2019: Results of a College of American Pathologists National Survey.

CONTEXT.­: The College of American Pathologists surveys provide national benchmarks of pathology practice for laboratories. OBJECTIVE.­: To investigate breast fine-needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy practice in domestic and international laboratories in 2019. DESIGN.­: We analyzed data from the College of American Pathologists Breast FNA Practice Supplemental Questionnaire that was distributed to laboratories participating in the 2019 College of American Pathologists Non-Gynecologic Cytopathology Education Program. RESULTS.­: Sixty-one percent (499 of 816) of respondent laboratories routinely evaluated breast FNAs. Cystic lesions were the most common indication, and radiologists primarily performed FNAs in most settings. Forty-five percent (220 of 491) of laboratories performed ancillary studies on breast FNA samples, but 33.8% (70 of 207) did not report fixation time for breast biomarker studies. Only 54.5% (271 of 497) of laboratories had a standardized reporting system and only 16.8% (82 of 488) were aware of the International Academy of Cytology Yokohama Breast FNA Biopsy Cytology Reporting System. There were significant differences among different types of institutions in several aspects of breast FNA practice, including frequency of concurrent FNA and core needle biopsy for the same lesion, primary personnel who performed the FNA, etc. Significant differences existed between domestic and international laboratories in slide preparation, ancillary studies, fixation time reporting, standardized/descriptive diagnosis, and International Academy of Cytology Yokohama Reporting System awareness. CONCLUSIONS.­: This is the first survey from the College of American Pathologists Cytopathology Committee to investigate breast FNA practices. The data reveal significant differences in breast FNA practice among different types of institutions and between domestic and international laboratories, and provide a baseline for future breast FNA studies in a variety of practice settings.

Trends in Thyroid Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology Practices: Results From a College of American Pathologists 2016 Practice Survey.

CONTEXT.­: The College of American Pathologists periodically surveys laboratories to determine changes in cytopathology practices. We report the results of a 2016 survey concerning thyroid fine-needle aspiration (FNA). OBJECTIVE.­: To provide a cross-sectional survey of thyroid cytology practices in 2016. DESIGN.­: In 2016, a survey was sent to 2013 laboratories participating in the College of American Pathologists Non-Gynecologic Cytology Education Program (NGC-A) requesting data from 2015-2016 on several topics relating to thyroid FNA. RESULTS.­: A total of 878 laboratories (43.6% of 2013) replied to the survey. Radiologists performed the most thyroid FNA procedures in most laboratories (70%; 529 of 756), followed by endocrinologists (18.7%; 141 of 756), and most of these were performed under ultrasound guidance (92.1%; 699 of 759). A total of 32.6% of respondents (251 of 769) provided feedback on unsatisfactory rates for nonpathology providers who performed FNA. Intraprocedural adequacy assessment was primarily performed by attending pathologists (77.4%; 490 of 633) or cytotechnologists (28.4%; 180 of 633). Most laboratories used the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology (89.8%; 701 of 781) and performed molecular testing based on clinician request (68.1%; 184 of 270) rather than FNA diagnosis. Correlation of thyroid excisions with prior cytology results most often occurred retrospectively (38.4%; 283 of 737) and was used for pathologist interpretive quality assurance purposes. CONCLUSIONS.­: These survey results offer a snapshot of national thyroid FNA cytology practices in 2016 and indicate that standardized cytology terminology is commonly used; pathologists perform most immediate adequacy assessments for thyroid FNA; laboratories use correlation statistics to evaluate pathologists' performance; and molecular tests are increasingly requested for indeterminate interpretations, but reflex molecular testing is rare.

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.