Digital pathology for reporting histopathology samples, including cancer screening samples - definitive evidence from a multisite study.

AIMS: To conduct a definitive multicentre comparison of digital pathology (DP) with light microscopy (LM) for reporting histopathology slides including breast and bowel cancer screening samples. METHODS: A total of 2024 cases (608 breast, 607 GI, 609 skin, 200 renal) were studied, including 207 breast and 250 bowel cancer screening samples. Cases were examined by four pathologists (16 study pathologists across the four speciality groups), using both LM and DP, with the order randomly assigned and 6 weeks between viewings. Reports were compared for clinical management concordance (CMC), meaning identical diagnoses plus differences which do not affect patient management. Percentage CMCs were computed using logistic regression models with crossed random-effects terms for case and pathologist. The obtained percentage CMCs were referenced to 98.3% calculated from previous studies. RESULTS: For all cases LM versus DP comparisons showed the CMC rates were 99.95% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 99.90-99.97] and 98.96 (95% CI = 98.42-99.32) for cancer screening samples. In speciality groups CMC for LM versus DP showed: breast 99.40% (99.06-99.62) overall and 96.27% (94.63-97.43) for cancer screening samples; [gastrointestinal (GI) = 99.96% (99.89-99.99)] overall and 99.93% (99.68-99.98) for bowel cancer screening samples; skin 99.99% (99.92-100.0); renal 99.99% (99.57-100.0). Analysis of clinically significant differences revealed discrepancies in areas where interobserver variability is known to be high, in reads performed with both modalities and without apparent trends to either. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing LM and DP CMC, overall rates exceed the reference 98.3%, providing compelling evidence that pathologists provide equivalent results for both routine and cancer screening samples irrespective of the modality used.

Treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: 12-month outcomes of the placebo versus rivaroxaban randomization of the SELECT-D Trial (SELECT-D: 12m).

BACKGROUND: The Anticoagulation Therapy in Selected Cancer Patients at Risk of Recurrence of Venous Thromboembolism (SELECT-D) trial demonstrated reduction in recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) but increased bleeding with rivaroxaban compared with dalteparin for treatment of acute VTE in cancer patients, at 6 months. Uncertainty remains around optimal duration of anticoagulation. OBJECTIVES: To assess VTE recurrence and bleeding, with anticoagulation or not, beyond 6 months. PATIENTS/METHODS: In SELECT-D, after 6 months of trial treatment for VTE, patients with active cancer and residual deep vein thrombosis (RDVT) or index pulmonary embolism (PE) were eligible for randomization to a further 6 months of rivaroxaban or placebo. Patients with no RDVT stopped anticoagulation. Primary outcome was VTE recurrence at 12 months. The second randomization closed prematurely because of low recruitment when 92 of the planned 300 patients were recruited. RESULTS: Ninety-two of 136 eligible patients were randomized to rivaroxaban or placebo. The cumulative VTE recurrence after 6 months from the second randomization was 14% with placebo and 4% with rivaroxaban (hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06-1.58). The major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding rates were 0% and 0% with placebo; and 5% (95% CI, 1-18) and 4% (95% CI, 1-17) with rivaroxaban. In an exploratory analysis, 7 (15%) of 46 placebo patients with RDVT or an index PE experienced recurrent VTE compared to none in the 35 patients in the RDVT-negative cohort (P = .03). CONCLUSION: The SELECT-D trial was underpowered to detect a statistically significant reduction in recurrent VTE with extended anticoagulation. The absence of RDVT and/or index PE, defined a population at low risk of recurrence.

Comparison of an Oral Factor Xa Inhibitor With Low Molecular Weight Heparin in Patients With Cancer With Venous Thromboembolism: Results of a Randomized Trial (SELECT-D).

Purpose Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in patients with cancer. Long-term daily subcutaneous low molecular weight heparin has been standard treatment for such patients. The purpose of this study was to assess if an oral factor Xa inhibitor, rivaroxaban, would offer an alternative treatment for VTE in patients with cancer. Patient and Methods In this multicenter, randomized, open-label, pilot trial in the United Kingdom, patients with active cancer who had symptomatic pulmonary embolism (PE), incidental PE, or symptomatic lower-extremity proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) were recruited. Allocation was to dalteparin (200 IU/kg daily during month 1, then 150 IU/kg daily for months 2-6) or rivaroxaban (15 mg twice daily for 3 weeks, then 20 mg once daily for a total of 6 months). The primary outcome was VTE recurrence over 6 months. Safety was assessed by major bleeding and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB). A sample size of 400 patients would provide estimates of VTE recurrence to within ± 4.5%, assuming a VTE recurrence rate at 6 months of 10%. Results A total of 203 patients were randomly assigned to each group, 58% of whom had metastases. Twenty-six patients experienced recurrent VTE (dalteparin, n = 18; rivaroxaban, n = 8). The 6-month cumulative VTE recurrence rate was 11% (95% CI, 7% to 16%) with dalteparin and 4% (95% CI, 2% to 9%) with rivaroxaban (hazard ratio [HR], 0.43; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.99). The 6-month cumulative rate of major bleeding was 4% (95% CI, 2% to 8%) for dalteparin and 6% (95% CI, 3% to 11%) for rivaroxaban (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 0.68 to 4.96). Corresponding rates of CRNMB were 4% (95% CI, 2% to 9%) and 13% (95% CI, 9% to 19%), respectively (HR, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.63 to 8.69). Conclusion Rivaroxaban was associated with relatively low VTE recurrence but higher CRNMB compared with dalteparin.