Three-Month Symptom Profiles Among Symptomatic Adults With Positive and Negative Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Tests: A Prospective Cohort Study From the INSPIRE Group.

BACKGROUND: Long-term symptoms following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are a major concern, yet their prevalence is poorly understood. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study comparing adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection (coronavirus disease-positive [COVID+]) with adults who tested negative (COVID-), enrolled within 28 days of a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved SARS-CoV-2 test result for active symptoms. Sociodemographic characteristics, symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection (assessed with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC] Person Under Investigation Symptom List), and symptoms of post-infectious syndromes (ie, fatigue, sleep quality, muscle/joint pains, unrefreshing sleep, and dizziness/fainting, assessed with CDC Short Symptom Screener for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome) were assessed at baseline and 3 months via electronic surveys sent via text or email. RESULTS: Among the first 1000 participants, 722 were COVID+ and 278 were COVID-. Mean age was 41.5 (SD 15.2); 66.3% were female, 13.4% were Black, and 15.3% were Hispanic. At baseline, SARS-CoV-2 symptoms were more common in the COVID+ group than the COVID- group. At 3 months, SARS-CoV-2 symptoms declined in both groups, although were more prevalent in the COVID+ group: upper respiratory symptoms/head/eyes/ears/nose/throat (HEENT; 37.3% vs 20.9%), constitutional (28.8% vs 19.4%), musculoskeletal (19.5% vs 14.7%), pulmonary (17.6% vs 12.2%), cardiovascular (10.0% vs 7.2%), and gastrointestinal (8.7% vs 8.3%); only 50.2% and 73.3% reported no symptoms at all. Symptoms of post-infectious syndromes were similarly prevalent among the COVID+ and COVID- groups at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately half of COVID+ participants, as compared with one-quarter of COVID- participants, had at least 1 SARS-CoV-2 symptom at 3 months, highlighting the need for future work to distinguish long COVID. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04610515.

Severe Fatigue and Persistent Symptoms at 3 Months Following Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infections During the Pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron Time Periods: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Most research on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants focuses on initial symptomatology with limited longer-term data. We characterized prevalences of prolonged symptoms 3 months post-SARS-CoV-2 infection across 3 variant time-periods (pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron). METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study of adults with acute illness tested for SARS-CoV-2 compared fatigue severity, fatigue symptoms, organ system-based symptoms, and ≥3 symptoms across variants among participants with a positive ("COVID-positive") or negative SARS-CoV-2 test ("COVID-negative") at 3 months after SARS-CoV-2 testing. Variant periods were defined by dates with ≥50% dominant strain. We performed multivariable logistic regression modeling to estimate independent effects of variants adjusting for sociodemographics, baseline health, and vaccine status. RESULTS: The study included 2402 COVID-positive and 821 COVID-negative participants. Among COVID-positives, 463 (19.3%) were pre-Delta, 1198 (49.9%) Delta, and 741 (30.8%) Omicron. The pre-Delta COVID-positive cohort exhibited more prolonged severe fatigue (16.7% vs 11.5% vs 12.3%; P = .017) and presence of ≥3 prolonged symptoms (28.4% vs 21.7% vs 16.0%; P < .001) compared with the Delta and Omicron cohorts. No differences were seen in the COVID-negatives across time-periods. In multivariable models adjusted for vaccination, severe fatigue and odds of having ≥3 symptoms were no longer significant across variants. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged symptoms following SARS-CoV-2 infection were more common among participants infected during pre-Delta than with Delta and Omicron; however, these differences were no longer significant after adjusting for vaccination status, suggesting a beneficial effect of vaccination on risk of long-term symptoms. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04610515.

Prognostic modeling of cutaneous melanoma stage I patients using cancer registry data identifies subsets with very-low melanoma mortality.

BACKGROUND: Evidence exists that escalating melanoma incidence is due in part to overdiagnosis, the diagnosis of lesions that will not lead to symptoms or death. The authors aimed to characterize subsets of melanoma patients with very-low risk of death that may be contributing to overdiagnosis. METHODS: Melanoma patients diagnosed in 2010 and 2011 with stage I lesions ≤1.0 mm thick and negative clinical lymph nodes from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database were selected. Classification and regression tree and logistic regression models were developed and validated to identify patients with very-low risk of death from melanoma within 7 years. Logistic models were also used to identify patients at higher risk of death among this group of stage I patients. RESULTS: Compared to an overall 7-year mortality from melanoma of 2.5% in these patients, a subset comprising 25% had a risk below 1%. Younger age at diagnosis and Clark level II were associated with low risk of death in all models. Breslow thickness below 0.4 mm, absence of mitogenicity, absence of ulceration, and female sex were also associated with lower mortality. A small subset of high-risk patients with >20% risk of death was also identified. CONCLUSION: Patients with very-low risk of dying from melanoma within 7 years of diagnosis were identified. Such cases warrant further study and consensus discussion to develop classification criteria, with the potential to be categorized using an alternative term such as "melanocytic neoplasms of low malignant potential." LAY SUMMARY: Although melanoma is the most serious skin cancer, most melanoma patients have high chances of survival. There is evidence that some lesions diagnosed as melanoma would never have caused symptoms or death, a phenomenon known as overdiagnosis. In this study, we used cancer registry data to identify a subset of early-stage melanoma patients with almost no melanoma deaths. Using two statistical approaches, we identified patients with <1% risk of dying from melanoma in 7 years. Such patients tended to be younger with minimal invasion into the skin. We also identified a very small patient subset with higher mortality risk.

From Image to Diagnosis: Characterizing Sources of Error in Histopathologic Interpretation.

An accurate histopathologic diagnosis on surgical biopsy material is necessary for the clinical management of patients and has important implications for research, clinical trial design/enrollment, and public health education. This study used a mixed methods approach to isolate sources of diagnostic error while residents and attending pathologists interpreted digitized breast biopsy slides. Ninety participants, including pathology residents and attending physicians at major United States medical centers reviewed a set of 14 digitized whole-slide images of breast biopsies. Each case had a consensus-defined diagnosis and critical region of interest (cROI) representing the most significant pathology on the slide. Participants were asked to view unmarked digitized slides, draw their participant region of interest (pROI), describe its features, and render a diagnosis. Participants' review behavior was tracked using case viewer software and an eye-tracking device. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated in comparison to the consensus diagnosis. We measured the frequency of errors emerging during 4 interpretive phases: (1) detecting the cROI, (2) recognizing its relevance, (3) using the correct terminology to describe findings in the pROI, and (4) making a diagnostic decision. According to eye-tracking data, trainees and attending pathologists were very likely (∼94% of the time) to find the cROI when inspecting a slide. However, trainees were less likely to consider the cROI relevant to their diagnosis. Pathology trainees (41% of cases) were more likely to use incorrect terminology to describe pROI features than attending pathologists (21% of cases). Failure to accurately describe features was the only factor strongly associated with an incorrect diagnosis. Identifying where errors emerge in the interpretive and/or descriptive process and working on building organ-specific feature recognition and verbal fluency in describing those features are critical steps for achieving competency in diagnostic decision making.

The Relationship Between Homeownership and Health by Race/Ethnicity Since the Foreclosure Crisis: California Health Interview Survey 2011-2018.

BACKGROUND: US housing policy places a high priority on homeownership, providing large homeowner subsidies that are justified in part by homeownership's purported health benefits. However, studies conducted before, during, and immediately after the 2007-2010 foreclosure crisis found that while homeownership is associated with better health-related outcomes for White households, that association is weaker or non-existent for African-American and Latinx households. It is not known whether those associations persist in the period since the foreclosure crisis changed the US homeownership landscape. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between homeownership and health and whether that relationship differs by race/ethnicity in the period since the foreclosure crisis. DESIGN: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 8 waves (2011-2018) of the California Health Interview Survey (n = 143,854, response rate 42.3 to 47.5%). PARTICIPANTS: We included all US citizen respondents ages 18 and older. MAIN MEASURES: The primary predictor variable was housing tenure (homeownership or renting). The primary outcomes were self-rated health, psychological distress, number of health conditions, and delays in receiving necessary medical care and/or medications. KEY RESULTS: Compared to renting, homeownership is associated with lower rates of reporting fair or poor health (OR = 0.86, P < 0.001), fewer health conditions (incidence rate ratio = 0.95, P = 0.03), and fewer delays in receiving medical care (OR = 0.81, P < 0.001) and medication (OR = 0.78, P < 0.001) for the overall study population. Overall, race/ethnicity was not a significant moderator of these associations in the post-crisis period. CONCLUSIONS: Homeownership has the potential to provide significant health-related benefits to minoritized communities, but this potential may be threatened by practices of racial exclusion and predatory inclusion. Further study is needed to elucidate health-promoting mechanisms within homeownership as well as potential harms of specific homeownership-promoting policies to develop healthier, more equitable housing policy.

Variability Among Breast Cancer Risk Classification Models When Applied at the Level of the Individual Woman.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer risk models guide screening and chemoprevention decisions, but the extent and effect of variability among models, particularly at the individual level, is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the accuracy and disagreement between commonly used risk models in categorizing individual women as average vs. high risk for developing invasive breast cancer. DESIGN: Comparison of three risk prediction models: Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT), Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) model, and International Breast Intervention Study (IBIS) model. SUBJECTS: Women 40 to 74 years of age presenting for screening mammography at a multisite health system between 2011 and 2015, with 5-year follow-up for cancer outcome. MAIN MEASURES: Comparison of model discrimination and calibration at the population level and inter-model agreement for 5-year breast cancer risk at the individual level using two cutoffs (≥ 1.67% and ≥ 3.0%). KEY RESULTS: A total of 31,115 women were included. When using the ≥ 1.67% threshold, more than 21% of women were classified as high risk for developing breast cancer in the next 5 years by one model, but average risk by another model. When using the ≥ 3.0% threshold, more than 5% of women had disagreements in risk severity between models. Almost half of the women (46.6%) were classified as high risk by at least one of the three models (e.g., if all three models were applied) for the threshold of ≥ 1.67%, and 11.1% were classified as high risk for ≥ 3.0%. All three models had similar accuracy at the population level. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer risk estimates for individual women vary substantially, depending on which risk assessment model is used. The choice of cutoff used to define high risk can lead to adverse effects for screening, preventive care, and quality of life for misidentified individuals. Clinicians need to be aware of the high false-positive and false-negative rates and variation between models when talking with patients.

Prevalence of Symptoms ≤12 Months After Acute Illness, by COVID-19 Testing Status Among Adults - United States, December 2020-March 2023.

To further the understanding of post-COVID conditions, and provide a more nuanced description of symptom progression, resolution, emergence, and reemergence after SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-like illness, analysts examined data from the Innovative Support for Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infections Registry (INSPIRE), a prospective multicenter cohort study. This report includes analysis of data on self-reported symptoms collected from 1,296 adults with COVID-like illness who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using a Food and Drug Administration-approved polymerase chain reaction or antigen test at the time of enrollment and reported symptoms at 3-month intervals for 12 months. Prevalence of any symptom decreased substantially between baseline and the 3-month follow-up, from 98.4% to 48.2% for persons who received a positive SARS-CoV-2 test results (COVID test-positive participants) and from 88.2% to 36.6% for persons who received negative SARS-CoV-2 test results (COVID test-negative participants). Persistent symptoms decreased through 12 months; no difference between the groups was observed at 12 months (prevalence among COVID test-positive and COVID test-negative participants = 18.3% and 16.1%, respectively; p>0.05). Both groups reported symptoms that emerged or reemerged at 6, 9, and 12 months. Thus, these symptoms are not unique to COVID-19 or to post-COVID conditions. Awareness that symptoms might persist for up to 12 months, and that many symptoms might emerge or reemerge in the year after COVID-like illness, can assist health care providers in understanding the clinical signs and symptoms associated with post-COVID-like conditions.

Retrospective Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Symptomatic Patients Prior to Widespread Diagnostic Testing in Southern California.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused one of the worst pandemics in recent history. Few reports have revealed that SARS-CoV-2 was spreading in the United States as early as the end of January. In this study, we aimed to determine if SARS-CoV-2 had been circulating in the Los Angeles (LA) area at a time when access to diagnostic testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was severely limited. METHODS: We used a pooling strategy to look for SARS-CoV-2 in remnant respiratory samples submitted for regular respiratory pathogen testing from symptomatic patients from November 2019 to early March 2020. We then performed sequencing on the positive samples. RESULTS: We detected SARS-CoV-2 in 7 specimens from 6 patients, dating back to mid-January. The earliest positive patient, with a sample collected on January 13, 2020 had no relevant travel history but did have a sibling with similar symptoms. Sequencing of these SARS-CoV-2 genomes revealed that the virus was introduced into the LA area from both domestic and international sources as early as January. CONCLUSIONS: We present strong evidence of community spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the LA area well before widespread diagnostic testing was being performed in early 2020. These genomic data demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 was being introduced into Los Angeles County from both international and domestic sources in January 2020.

Characterization of multiple diagnostic terms in melanocytic skin lesion pathology reports.

BACKGROUND: Histopathologically ambiguous melanocytic lesions lead some pathologists to list multiple diagnostic considerations in the pathology report. The frequency and circumstance of multiple diagnostic considerations remain poorly characterized. METHODS: Two hundred and forty skin biopsy samples were interpreted by 187 pathologists (8976 independent diagnoses) and classified according to a diagnostic/treatment stratification (MPATH-Dx). RESULTS: Multiple diagnoses in different MPATH-Dx classes were used in n = 1320 (14.7%) interpretations, with 97% of pathologists and 91% of cases having at least one such interpretation. Multiple diagnoses were more common for intermediate risk lesions and are associated with greater subjective difficulty and lower confidence. We estimate that 6% of pathology reports for melanocytic lesions in the United States contain two diagnoses of different MPATH-Dx prognostic classes, and 2% of cases are given two diagnoses with significant treatment implications. CONCLUSIONS: Difficult melanocytic diagnoses in skin may necessitate multiple diagnostic considerations; however, as patients increasingly access their health records and retrieve pathology reports (as mandated by US law), uncertainty should be expressed unambiguously.

Histopathological diagnosis of cutaneous melanocytic lesions: blinded and nonblinded second opinions offer similar improvement in diagnostic accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies of second opinions in the diagnosis of melanocytic skin lesions have examined blinded second opinions, which do not reflect usual clinical practice. The current study, conducted in the USA, investigated both blinded and nonblinded second opinions for their impact on diagnostic accuracy. METHODS: In total, 100 melanocytic skin biopsy cases, ranging from benign to invasive melanoma, were interpreted by 74 dermatopathologists. Subsequently, 151 dermatopathologists performed nonblinded second and third reviews. We compared the accuracy of single reviewers, second opinions obtained from independent, blinded reviewers and second opinions obtained from sequential, nonblinded reviewers. Accuracy was defined with respect to a consensus reference diagnosis. RESULTS: The mean case-level diagnostic accuracy of single reviewers was 65.3% (95% CI 63.4-67.2%). Second opinions arising from sequential, nonblinded reviewers significantly improved accuracy to 69.9% (95% CI 68.0-71.7%; P < 0.001). Similarly, second opinions arising from blinded reviewers improved upon the accuracy of single reviewers (69.2%; 95% CI 68.0-71.7%). Nonblinded reviewers were more likely than blinded reviewers to give diagnoses in the same diagnostic classes as the first diagnosis. Nonblinded reviewers tended to be more confident when they agreed with previous reviewers, even with inaccurate diagnoses. CONCLUSION: We found that both blinded and nonblinded second reviewers offered a similar modest improvement in diagnostic accuracy compared with single reviewers. Obtaining second opinions with knowledge of previous reviews tends to generate agreement among reviews, and may generate unwarranted confidence in an inaccurate diagnosis. Combining aspects of both blinded and nonblinded review in practice may leverage the advantages while mitigating the disadvantages of each approach. Specifically, a second pathologist could give an initial diagnosis blinded to the results of the first pathologist, with subsequent nonblinded discussion between the two pathologists if their diagnoses differ.

Segmenting Skin Biopsy Images with Coarse and Sparse Annotations using U-Net.

The number of melanoma diagnoses has increased dramatically over the past three decades, outpacing almost all other cancers. Nearly 1 in 4 skin biopsies is of melanocytic lesions, highlighting the clinical and public health importance of correct diagnosis. Deep learning image analysis methods may improve and complement current diagnostic and prognostic capabilities. The histologic evaluation of melanocytic lesions, including melanoma and its precursors, involves determining whether the melanocytic population involves the epidermis, dermis, or both. Semantic segmentation of clinically important structures in skin biopsies is a crucial step towards an accurate diagnosis. While training a segmentation model requires ground-truth labels, annotation of large images is a labor-intensive task. This issue becomes especially pronounced in a medical image dataset in which expert annotation is the gold standard. In this paper, we propose a two-stage segmentation pipeline using coarse and sparse annotations on a small region of the whole slide image as the training set. Segmentation results on whole slide images show promising performance for the proposed pipeline.

Histopathologic synoptic reporting of invasive melanoma: How reliable are the data?

BACKGROUND: Synoptic reporting is recommended by many guideline committees to encourage the thorough histologic documentation necessary for optimal management of patients with melanoma. METHODS: One hundred fifty-one pathologists from 40 US states interpreted 41 invasive melanoma cases. For each synoptic reporting factor, the authors identified cases with "complete agreement" (all participants recorded the same value) versus any disagreement. Pairwise agreement was calculated for each case as the proportion of pairs of responses that agreed, where paired responses were generated by the comparison of each reviewer's response with all others. RESULTS: There was complete agreement among all reviewers for 22 of the 41 cases (54%) on Breslow thickness dichotomized at 0.8 mm, with pairwise agreement ranging from 49% to 100% across the 41 cases. There was complete agreement for "no ulceration" in 24 of the 41 cases (59%), with pairwise agreement ranging from 42% to 100%. Tumor transected at base had complete agreement for 26 of the 41 cases (63%), with pairwise agreement ranging from 31% to 100%. Mitotic rate, categorized as 0/mm2 , 1/mm2 , or 2/mm2 , had complete agreement for 17 of the 41 cases (41%), with pairwise agreement ranging from 36% to 100%. Regression saw complete agreement for 14 of 41 cases (34%), with pairwise agreement ranging from 40% to 100%. Lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, and microscopic satellites were rarely reported as present. Respectively, these prognostic factors had complete agreement for 32 (78%), 37 (90%), and 18 (44%) of the 41 cases, and the ranges of pairwise agreement were 47% to 100%, 70% to 100%, and 53% to 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These findings alert pathologists and clinicians to the problem of interobserver variability in recording critical prognostic factors. LAY SUMMARY: This study addresses variability in the assessment and reporting of critical characteristics of invasive melanomas that are used by clinicians to guide patient care. The authors characterize the diagnostic variability among pathologists and their reporting methods in light of recently updated national guidelines. Results demonstrate considerable variability in the diagnostic reporting of melanoma with regard to the following: Breslow thickness, mitotic rate, ulceration, regression, and microscopic satellites. This work serves to alert pathologists and clinicians to the existence of variability in reporting these prognostic factors.

Words Matter: What Do Patients Find Judgmental or Offensive in Outpatient Notes?

BACKGROUND: Sharing outpatient notes with patients may bring clinically important benefits, but notes may sometimes cause patients to feel judged or offended, and thereby reduce trust. OBJECTIVE: As part of a larger survey examining the effects of open notes, we sought to understand how many patients feel judged or offended due to something they read in outpatient notes, and why. DESIGN: We analyzed responses from a large Internet survey of adult patients who used secure patient portals and had at least 1 visit note available in a 12-month period at 2 large academic medical systems in Boston and Seattle, and in a rural integrated health system in Pennsylvania. PARTICIPANTS: Adult ambulatory patients with portal accounts in health systems that offered open notes for up to 7 years. APPROACH: (1) Quantitative analysis of 2 dichotomous questions, and (2) qualitative thematic analysis of free-text responses on what patients found judgmental or offensive. KEY RESULTS: Among 22,959 patient respondents who had read at least one note and answered the 2 questions, 2,411 (10.5%) reported feeling judged and/or offended by something they read in their note(s). Patients who reported poor health, unemployment, or inability to work were more likely to feel judged or offended. Among the 2,411 patients who felt judged and/or offended, 2,137 (84.5%) wrote about what prompted their feelings. Three thematic domains emerged: (1) errors and surprises, (2) labeling, and (3) disrespect. CONCLUSIONS: One in 10 respondents reported feeling judged/offended by something they read in an outpatient note due to the perception that it contained errors, surprises, labeling, or evidence of disrespect. The content and tone may be particularly important to patients in poor health. Enhanced clinician awareness of the patient perspective may promote an improved medical lexicon, reduce the transmission of bias to other clinicians, and reinforce healing relationships.

Unmet Medical Needs Among Adults Who Move due to Unaffordable Housing: California Health Interview Survey, 2011-2017.

BACKGROUND: Stable, affordable housing is an established determinant of health. As affordable housing shortages across the USA threaten to displace people from their homes, it is important to understand the implications of cost-related residential moves for healthcare access. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between cost-related moves and unmet medical needs. DESIGN: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of 7 waves (2011-2017) of the California Health Interview Survey. PARTICIPANTS: We included all respondents ages 18 and older. MAIN MEASURES: The primary predictor variable was residential move history in the past 5 years (cost-related move, non-cost-related move, or no move). The primary outcome was unmet medical needs in the past year (necessary medications and/or medical care that were delayed or not received). KEY RESULTS: Our sample included 146,417 adults (42-47% response rate), representing a weighted population of 28,518,590. Overall, 20.3% of the sample reported unmet medical needs in the past year, and 4.9% reported a cost-related move in the past 5 years. In multivariable logistic regression models, adjusted risk of unmet medical needs increased for adults with both cost-related moves (aOR 1.38; 95% CI 1.19-1.59) and non-cost-related moves (aOR 1.17; 95% CI 1.09-1.26) compared to those with no moves. Among people who had moved, those with cost-related moves were more likely to report unmet medical needs compared to people with non-cost-related moves (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: People who have moved due to unaffordable housing represent a population at increased risk for unmet medical needs. Policy makers seeking to improve population health should consider strategies to limit cost-related moves and to mitigate their adverse effects on healthcare access.

Automated identification and assignment of colonoscopy surveillance recommendations for individuals with colorectal polyps.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Determining surveillance intervals for patients with colorectal polyps is critical but time-consuming and challenging to do reliably. We present the development and assessment of a pipeline that leverages natural language processing techniques to automatically extract and analyze relevant polyp findings from free-text colonoscopy and pathology reports. Using this information, we categorized individual patients into 6 postcolonoscopy surveillance intervals defined by the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. METHODS: Using a set of 546 randomly selected colonoscopy and pathology reports from 324 patients in a single health system, we used a combination of statistical classifiers and rule-based methods to extract polyp properties from each report type, associate properties with unique polyps, and classify a patient into 1 of 6 risk categories by integrating information from both report types. We then assessed the pipeline's performance by determining the positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, and F-score of the algorithm, compared with the determination of surveillance intervals by a gastroenterologist. RESULTS: The pipeline was developed using 346 reports (224 colonoscopy and 122 pathology) from 224 patients and evaluated on an independent test set of 200 reports (100 colonoscopy and 100 pathology) from 100 patients. We achieved an average PPV, sensitivity, and F-score of .92, .95, and .93, respectively, across targeted entities for colonoscopy. Pathology extraction achieved a PPV, sensitivity, and F-score of .95, .97, and .96. The system achieved an overall accuracy of 92% in assigning the recommended interval for surveillance colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility of using machine learning to automatically extract findings and classify patients to appropriate risk categories and corresponding surveillance intervals. Incorporating this system can facilitate proactive and timely follow-up after screening colonoscopy and enable real-time quality assessment of prevention programs and providers.

Terminology for melanocytic skin lesions and the MPATH-Dx classification schema: A survey of dermatopathologists.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic terms used in histopathology reports of cutaneous melanocytic lesions are not standardized. We describe dermatopathologists' views regarding diverse diagnostic terminology and the utility of the Melanocytic Pathology Assessment Tool and Hierarchy for Diagnosis (MPATH-Dx) for categorizing melanocytic lesions. METHODS: July 2018-2019 survey of board-certified and/or fellowship-trained dermatopathologists with experience interpreting melanocytic lesions. RESULTS: Among 160 participants, 99% reported witnessing different terminology being used for the same melanocytic lesion. Most viewed diverse terminology as confusing to primary care physicians (98%), frustrating to pathologists (83%), requiring more of their time as a consultant (64%), and providing necessary clinical information (52%). Most perceived that adoption of the MPATH-Dx would: improve communication with other pathologists and treating physicians (87%), generally be a change for the better (80%), improve patient care (79%), be acceptable to clinical colleagues (68%), save time in pathology report documentation (53%), and protect from malpractice (51%). CONCLUSIONS: Most dermatopathologists view diverse terminology as contributing to miscommunication with clinicians and patients, adversely impacting patient care. They view the MPATH-Dx as a promising tool to standardize terminology and improve communication. The MPATH-Dx may be a useful supplement to conventional pathology reports. Further revision and refinement are necessary for widespread clinical use.

Patients Contributing to Visit Notes: Mixed Methods Evaluation of OurNotes.

BACKGROUND: Secure patient portals are widely available, and patients use them to view their electronic health records, including their clinical notes. We conducted experiments asking them to cogenerate notes with their clinicians, an intervention called OurNotes. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess patient and provider experiences and attitudes after 12 months of a pilot intervention. METHODS: Before scheduled primary care visits, patients were asked to submit a word-constrained, unstructured interval history and an agenda for what they would like to discuss at the visit. Using site-specific methods, their providers were invited to incorporate the submissions into notes documenting the visits. Sites served urban, suburban, and rural patients in primary care practices in 4 academic health centers in Boston (Massachusetts), Lebanon (New Hampshire), Denver (Colorado), and Seattle (Washington). Each practice offered electronic access to visit notes (open notes) to its patients for several years. A mixed methods evaluation used tracking data and electronic survey responses from patients and clinicians. Participants were 174 providers and 1962 patients who submitted at least 1 previsit form. We asked providers about the usefulness of the submissions, effects on workflow, and ideas for the future. We asked patients about difficulties and benefits of providing the requested information and ideas for future improvements. RESULTS: Forms were submitted before 9.15% (5365/58,652) eligible visits, and 43.7% (76/174) providers and 26.76% (525/1962) patients responded to the postintervention evaluation surveys; 74 providers and 321 patients remembered receiving and completing the forms and answered the survey questions. Most clinicians thought interim patient histories (69/74, 93%) and patient agendas (72/74, 97%) as good ideas, 70% (52/74) usually or always incorporated them into visit notes, 54% (40/74) reported no change in visit length, and 35% (26/74) thought they saved time. Their most common suggestions related to improving notifications when patient forms were received, making it easier to find the form and insert it into the note, and educating patients about how best to prepare their submissions. Patient respondents were generally well educated, most found the history (259/321, 80.7%) and agenda (286/321, 89.1%) questions not difficult to answer; more than 92.2% (296/321) thought sending answers before the visit a good idea; 68.8% (221/321) thought the questions helped them prepare for the visit. Common suggestions by patients included learning to write better answers and wanting to know that their submissions were read by their clinicians. At the end of the pilot, all participating providers chose to continue the OurNotes previsit form, and sites considered expanding the intervention to more clinicians and adapting it for telemedicine visits. CONCLUSIONS: OurNotes interests patients, and providers experience it as a positive intervention. Participation by patients, care partners, clinicians, and electronic health record experts will facilitate further development.

More scanning, but not zooming, is associated with diagnostic accuracy in evaluating digital breast pathology slides.

Diagnoses of medical images can invite strikingly diverse strategies for image navigation and visual search. In computed tomography screening for lung nodules, distinct strategies, termed scanning and drilling, relate to both radiologists' clinical experience and accuracy in lesion detection. Here, we examined associations between search patterns and accuracy for pathologists (N = 92) interpreting a diverse set of breast biopsy images. While changes in depth in volumetric images reveal new structures through movement in the z-plane, in digital pathology changes in depth are associated with increased magnification. Thus, "drilling" in radiology may be more appropriately termed "zooming" in pathology. We monitored eye-movements and navigation through digital pathology slides to derive metrics of how quickly the pathologists moved through XY (scanning) and Z (zooming) space. Prior research on eye-movements in depth has categorized clinicians as either "scanners" or "drillers." In contrast, we found that there was no reliable association between a clinician's tendency to scan or zoom while examining digital pathology slides. Thus, in the current work we treated scanning and zooming as continuous predictors rather than categorizing as either a "scanner" or "zoomer." In contrast to prior work in volumetric chest images, we found significant associations between accuracy and scanning rate but not zooming rate. These findings suggest fundamental differences in the relative value of information types and review behaviors across two image formats. Our data suggest that pathologists gather critical information by scanning on a given plane of depth, whereas radiologists drill through depth to interrogate critical features.

Pathologists' agreement on treatment suggestions for melanocytic skin lesions.

BACKGROUND: Although treatment guidelines exist for melanoma in situ and invasive melanoma, guidelines for other melanocytic skin lesions do not exist. OBJECTIVE: To examine pathologists' treatment suggestions for a broad spectrum of melanocytic skin lesions and compare them with existing guidelines. METHODS: Pathologists (N = 187) completed a survey and then provided diagnoses and treatment suggestions for 240 melanocytic skin lesions. Physician characteristics associated with treatment suggestions were evaluated with multivariable modeling. RESULTS: Treatment suggestions were concordant with National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for the majority of cases interpreted as melanoma in situ (73%) and invasive melanoma (86%). Greater variability of treatment suggestions was seen for other lesion types without existing treatment guidelines. Characteristics associated with provision of treatment suggestions discordant with National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines were low caseloads (invasive melanoma), lack of fellowship training or board certification (melanoma in situ), and more than 10 years of experience (invasive melanoma and melanoma in situ). LIMITATIONS: Pathologists could not perform immunohistochemical staining or other diagnostic tests; only 1 glass side was provided per biopsy case. CONCLUSIONS: Pathologists' treatment suggestions vary significantly for melanocytic lesions, with lower variability for lesion types with national guidelines. Results suggest the need for standardization of treatment guidelines for all melanocytic lesion types.

Factors associated with use of immunohistochemical markers in the histopathological diagnosis of cutaneous melanocytic lesions.

BACKGROUND: Melanocytic tumors are often challenging and constitute almost one in four skin biopsies. Immunohistochemical (IHC) studies may assist diagnosis; however, indications for their use are not standardized. METHODS: A test set of 240 skin biopsies of melanocytic tumors was examined by 187 pathologists from 10 US states, interpreting 48 cases in Phase I and either 36 or 48 cases in Phase II. Participant and diagnosis characteristics were compared between those who reported they would have ordered, or who would have not ordered IHC on individual cases. Intraobserver analysis examined consistency in the intent to order when pathologists interpreted the same cases on two occasions. RESULTS: Of 187 participants interpreting 48 cases each, 21 (11%) did not request IHC tests for any case, 85 (45%) requested testing for 1 to 6 cases, and 81 (43%) requested testing for ≥6 cases. Of 240 cases, 229 had at least one participant requesting testing. Only 2 out of 240 cases had more than 50% of participants requesting testing. Increased utilization of testing was associated with younger age of pathologist, board-certification in dermatopathology, low confidence in diagnosis, and lesions in intermediate MPATH-Dx classes 2 to 4. The median intraobserver concordance for requesting tests among 72 participants interpreting the same 48 cases in Phases I and II was 81% (IQR 73%-90%) and the median Kappa statistic was 0.20 (IQR 0.00, 0.39). CONCLUSION: Substantial variability exists among pathologists in utilizing IHC.