The Upgrade Risk of B3 Lesions to (Pre)Invasive Breast Cancer After Diagnosis on Core Needle or Vacuum Assisted Biopsy. A Belgian National Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Flat epithelial atypia (FEA), lobular neoplasia (LN), papillary lesions (PL), radial scar (RS) and atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) are lesions of uncertain malignant potential and classified as B3 lesions by the European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Current management is usually wide local excision (WE), surveillance may be sufficient for some. We investigated the upgrade rate of B3 lesions to breast malignancy in a subsequent resection specimen after diagnosis on core needle-or vacuum assisted biopsy (CNB-VAB) in a national population-based series. METHODS: Using data from the Belgian Cancer Registry (BCR) between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2016, inclusion criteria were new diagnosis of a B3 lesion on CNB or VAB with subsequent histological assessment on a wider excision specimen. Histological agreement between first- and follow-up investigation was analyzed to determine the upgrade risk to ductal adenocarcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive breast cancer (IC) according to the type of B3 lesion. RESULTS: Of 1855 diagnosed B3 lesions, 812 were included in this study: 551 after CNB-261 after VAB. After diagnosis on CNB and VAB, we found 19.0% and 14.9% upgrade to malignancy respectively. Upgrade risks after CNB and VAB were: FEA 39.5% and 17.6%; LN 40.5% and 4.3%; PL 10.4% and 12.5%; RS 25.7%and 0.0%; ADH 29.5% and 20.0%. CONCLUSION: Based on the observed upgrade rate we propose three recommendations: first, resection of ADH, and FEA with WE; second, resection of RS and classical LN with therapeutic VAB and further surveillance when radio-pathological correlation is concordant; third, surveillance of PL.

The Significance of External Quality Assessment Schemes for Molecular Testing in Clinical Laboratories.

External quality assessment (EQA) schemes are a tool for clinical laboratories to evaluate and manage the quality of laboratory practice with the support of an independent party (i.e., an EQA provider). Depending on the context, there are different types of EQA schemes available, as well as various EQA providers, each with its own field of expertise. In this review, an overview of the general requirements for EQA schemes and EQA providers based on international guidelines is provided. The clinical and scientific value of these kinds of schemes for clinical laboratories, clinicians and patients are highlighted, in addition to the support EQA can provide to other types of laboratories, e.g., laboratories affiliated to biotech companies. Finally, recent developments and challenges in laboratory medicine and quality management, for example, the introduction of artificial intelligence in the laboratory and the shift to a more individual-approach instead of a laboratory-focused approach, are discussed. EQA schemes should represent current laboratory practice as much as possible, which poses the need for EQA providers to introduce latest laboratory innovations in their schemes and to apply up-to-date guidelines. By incorporating these state-of-the-art techniques, EQA aims to contribute to continuous learning.

External Quality Assessment 2.0: The Importance of a Standardized Implementation of TILs for Daily and Trial Practices.

Increasing data suggests that an intact immune system is required for improvedoutcomes in patients with Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2+) and Triple Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC) [...].

Interobserver Agreement of PD-L1/SP142 Immunohistochemistry and Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes (TILs) in Distant Metastases of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Proof-of-Concept Study. A Report on Behalf of the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group.

Patients with advanced triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) benefit from treatment with atezolizumab, provided that the tumor contains ≥1% of PD-L1/SP142-positive immune cells. Numbers of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) vary strongly according to the anatomic localization of TNBC metastases. We investigated inter-pathologist agreement in the assessment of PD-L1/SP142 immunohistochemistry and TILs. Ten pathologists evaluated PD-L1/SP142 expression in a proficiency test comprising 28 primary TNBCs, as well as PD-L1/SP142 expression and levels of TILs in 49 distant TNBC metastases with various localizations. Interobserver agreement for PD-L1 status (positive vs. negative) was high in the proficiency test: the corresponding scores as percentages showed good agreement with the consensus diagnosis. In TNBC metastases, there was substantial variability in PD-L1 status at the individual patient level. For one in five patients, the chance of treatment was essentially random, with half of the pathologists designating them as positive and half negative. Assessment of PD-L1/SP142 and TILs as percentages in TNBC metastases showed poor and moderate agreement, respectively. Additional training for metastatic TNBC is required to enhance interobserver agreement. Such training, focusing on metastatic specimens, seems worthwhile, since the same pathologists obtained high percentages of concordance (ranging from 93% to 100%) on the PD-L1 status of primary TNBCs.

Laboratory reporting on the clinical spectrum of CFTR p.Arg117His: Still room for improvement.

BACKGROUND: The clinical spectrum associated with cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) variant p.Arg117His is highly variable, ranging from full-blown cystic fibrosis (CF) in a small number of cases to CFTR-related disorders (CFTR-RDs) or no symptoms at all. Therefore, taking into account phenotype variability is essential for interpretation. External quality assessment (EQA) schemes can help laboratories to objectively assess the quality of genotyping and reporting by the laboratory. METHODS: We performed a retrospective longitudinal data analysis on laboratory performance regarding the interpretation of p.Arg117His during CF EQA scheme participation. Completeness and accuracy of reporting on two mock clinical cases were each compared over time (case 1: 2005, 2007 and 2012; case 2: 2015 and 2018). These cases concerned subjects compound heterozygous for p.Phe508del and p.Arg117His in cis with 7T, but with different clinical backgrounds (family planning (case 1) versus diagnostic testing for a child (case 2)). Furthermore, we analyzed the influence of previous participations, annual test volume, accreditation status and laboratory setting on overall performance. RESULTS: Overall performance improved over time, except during the 2007 CF EQA scheme. In addition, previous participations had a beneficial effect on laboratory performance. Accreditation status, annual test volume and laboratory setting did not significantly influence total interpretation scores. CONCLUSIONS: In general, laboratories performed well on both cases, although reporting on the variable clinical spectrum of p.Arg117His in cis with 7T and on the disease liability of individual CFTR variants can still improve. Moreover, this study underlined the educational role of CF EQA schemes.