Reliably making the primary diagnosis of mesothelioma utilizing serous fluid cytology specimens: an institutional experience.

INTRODUCTION: The diagnosis of mesothelioma has historically been challenging, especially on serous fluid cytology (SFC). Distinguishing between reactive and neoplastic mesothelial cells can be difficult on cytomorphology alone. However, additional ancillary tests, such as BRCA1 associated protein-1 immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization for cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A deletion, can provide a sensitive and highly specific method of proving malignancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SFC specimens diagnosed as mesothelioma, suspicious for mesothelioma (SM), and atypical mesothelial cells (AMCs) since 2012 were identified by querying the laboratory information system. Clinical data and pathologic parameters were gathered. RESULTS: One hundred ten cases of mesothelioma, SM, and AMC were identified. Of these, 61 cases had a definitive diagnosis of mesothelioma on SFC. Average age at SFC diagnosis was 67 years (26-87 years), with most patients being male (67%). Out of the 61 cases, 11 cases (18%) had an initial diagnosis of mesothelioma made on SFC specimens, with 5 of these 11 cases being in patients that never received a histologic diagnosis of mesothelioma. Ancillary studies were utilized in all 11 cases. An initial diagnosis of metastatic mesothelioma was made on SFC in 9 cases (15%). For 6 of these 9 cases, the SFC diagnosis was the sole diagnosis of metastatic mesothelioma without a companion histologic diagnosis. In addition, 15 cases were diagnosed as SM, with 11 of these cases following a definitive mesothelioma diagnosis. Thirty-four cases were diagnosed as AMC, with 27 cases following a definitive mesothelioma diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of mesothelioma can be reliably made on SFC with the appropriate cytomorphology criteria and/or confirmatory ancillary testing.

A comprehensive review of anal cancer-with a special focus on anal cytology.

The diagnosis of anal cancer is relatively uncommon, but its incidence has been steadily increasing in high-risk populations. In the 2001 Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology, anal cytology was introduced as a component. Since then, it has been recognized as a potential tool for screening anal cancer, often in conjunction with high-resolution anoscopy. There are notable similarities between anal cancer and cervical cancer, including the causative role of human papillomavirus. However, there are also significant differences, particularly in terms of disease prevalence. Anal cytology may be used as a primary screening test, and in the event of abnormalities, patients are subsequently directed for high-resolution anoscopy. However, the best approach for anal cancer screening is yet to be determined and uniformly implemented. This comprehensive review article provides an in-depth analysis of the epidemiology and incidence of anal precursor and malignant lesions. It explores the various methods of sample procurement, preparation, interpretation (including sensitivity and specificity), and reporting terminology in anal cytology. The article also addresses the significance of concurrent high-risk human papillomavirus screening in anal cytology and its role in screening programs. Furthermore, it discusses the follow-up, prevention, and subsequent management strategies for anal cancers. By synthesizing current knowledge in these areas, this review aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of anal cytology and its implications in the early detection, prevention, and management of anal neoplasia and cancer.

Reassessing the optimal volume for malignancy detection in serous fluid cytology.

BACKGROUND: The international system for reporting serous fluid cytopathology (TIS) recommends submitting at least 50-75 mL of serous fluid to decrease false-negative results. However, prior studies did not agree on specific volume requirements or consensus adequacy criteria. Our study aims to assess whether fluid volume affects the adequacy rate and to assess the minimum volume necessary for optimal adequacy in pleural and peritoneal fluids. METHODS: A total of 8530 serous fluid cytology cases were identified in the laboratory information system. Differences in mean fluid volume received in the laboratory were compared using an ANOVA Games-Howell test based on TIS category. The percentage of malignant diagnoses across the volume ranges of 0 to 5 mL, 5 to 10 mL, 10 to 25 mL, 25 to 50 mL, 50 to 75 mL, 75 to 100 mL, 100 to 150 mL, 150 to 250 mL, 250 to 500 mL, 500 to 2000 mL was compared in pleural and peritoneal fluids using a chi-square test, and a SiZer analysis was performed. RESULTS: Mean fluid volume in inadequate, atypical, and negative cases was significantly lower compared to positive cases. A SiZer analysis showed a positive relationship between the malignancy fraction of pleural and peritoneal fluids and fluid volume. The percentage of malignant diagnoses in pleural and peritoneal fluid samples increased significantly up to a volume range of 75-100 mL. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant relationship between fluid volume, adequacy and detection of malignancy in serous effusion cytopathology. The malignancy fraction increases with larger fluid volumes but at least 75-100 mL of fluid should be submitted for optimal diagnosis of malignancy in pleural and peritoneal fluids.

Educational Case: High-Grade Serous Carcinoma of the Ovary.

The following fictional case is intended as a learning tool within the Pathology Competencies for Medical Education (PCME), a set of national standards for teaching pathology. These are divided into three basic competencies: Disease Mechanisms and Processes, Organ System Pathology, and Diagnostic Medicine and Therapeutic Pathology. For additional information, and a full list of learning objectives for all three competencies, seehttp://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2374289517715040.1.

Prosigna® breast cancer assay: histopathologic correlation, development, and assessment of size, nodal status, Ki-67 (SiNK™) index for breast cancer prognosis.

The Prosigna® assay is a United States Food and Drug Administration (US-FDA) cleared molecular test for prognostic use in hormone receptor-positive stage I/II breast cancer in postmenopausal women. We analyzed histopathologic features of 79 cases with Prosigna® assay results and found a significant correlation between tumor size, grade, and Ki-67 labeling index with Prosigna® score (0-40, 41-60, and 61-100) and Prosigna® risk categories. Since the Prosigna® risk stratification is influenced by lymph node status, we designed an index that included lymph node status and the two most correlated variables (size and Ki-67 labeling index). This was termed the size, nodal, and Ki-67 (SiNK™) index and is calculated as follows: (size in mm) + (pN × 10) + (Ki-67 labeling index). The SiNK™ index was divided into ≤40 and >40 to test its prognostic significance in a well-characterized dataset of 106 ER+/HER2-negative stage I-II invasive breast cancers treated with standard multi-modality therapy with long term follow-up (average 101 months follow-up). Patients with SiNK™ ≤40 showed significantly improved distant recurrence-free survival (96% distant recurrence-free survival in SiNK™ ≤40 compared to 81% in SiNK™ >40; log-rank test p value: 0.0027). SiNK™ provides strong prognostic information in ERo+/HER2-negative breast cancers. SiNK™ index is simple to calculate using data from routine pathology reports. This should be further evaluated in larger datasets.

HPV-Associated Atypical Mitotic Figures in Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions of the Lower Female Genital Tract.

OBJECTIVES: Atypical mitoses with rod and dot-shaped extra pieces of chromosomes separate to the main spindle are commonly seen in HPV-associated intraepithelial lesions. To determine the reproducibility and correlation of HPV-associated atypical mitoses (HAM) with histological diagnosis and p16 status, we performed a retrospective study. METHODS: A total of 100 consecutive cervical biopsies, 10 vulvar HSIL (usual VIN), 10 differentiated VIN, 10 vulvar condylomata, 5 normal proliferative endometrial, and 5 normal ovarian follicles were assessed. The first 10 mitoses were examined in the cervical biopsies, and the case recorded as positive when one HAM was identified. The first 50 mitoses in the vulvar cases and controls were examined, and the percentage of HAM was calculated. RESULTS: HAM were found in 62.5% of HSIL, 14.7% of LSIL, and 0% of benign cervical biopsies. When p16 was positive, 62.7% showed HAM, and when p16 was negative, 12.5% showed HAM. HAM were commonly found in vulvar HSIL, 12% of all mitoses, but extra dots of chromosome were also occasionally found in the mitoses of differentiated VIN (1%) and rarely in normal controls (0.2%). No HAM were found in condylomata. CONCLUSIONS: HAM was useful to confirm SIL, but the incidence was too low for absence to exclude SIL. Although HAM are more common in HSIL, they cannot be relied upon to distinguish HSIL from LSIL. The dot form of HAM is less reliable than the rod form, as extra dots of chromosomes may be occasionally seen in differentiated VIN and rarely seen in normal proliferative endometrium.