Developing dashboards for performance improvement in cytopathology.

INTRODUCTION: Cytopathology has well-defined and objective quality metrics for monitoring the performance of cytopathologists (CPs) and cytotechnologists (CTs). We transformed these metrics into dashboards for real-time visualization and on-demand feedback. METHODS: Dashboards were constructed with data from the previous 10 calendar years using the software Tableau. The dashboards for CPs were designed to display 2 gynecologic metrics and 1 nongynecologic metric: the ASCUS:SIL ratio, the percentage of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive ASCUS interpretations (HPV+ ASCUS rate), and the proportion of AUS/FLUS thyroid interpretations. CT dashboards were designed to include these plus 2 others: the percentage of Papanicolaou tests referred for CP review and the percentage of Papanicolaou tests interpreted as unsatisfactory. Established professional benchmarks or standard deviations were used to set color-coded "goal," "borderline," and "attention" zones. RESULTS: Personal dashboards were successfully developed and implemented for CPs and CTs in the laboratory, with results that are automatically updated every week, requiring minimal curation. Each CP and CT has a unique link that allows them access to their results at any time. Color-coded displays show the individual their quality metrics over the past 10 years, with a snapshot of data from the past 3 months. The laboratory director has a unique link that allows the director access to results for each individual and the laboratory in aggregate. CONCLUSIONS: Personalized dashboards enable individuals to access their performance metrics on demand and examine recent performance as well as patterns over time. This facilitates self-motivation to improve performance and adhere to professional benchmarks.

ACGME Milestones 2.0: why and what's new for cytopathology?

BACKGROUND: Primary stakeholders in the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestones Project are: ACGME, Residency Programs, Residents, Fellowship Programs, Fellows, and Certification Boards. The intent of the Milestones is to describe the educational and professional developmental trajectory of a trainee from the first stages of their postgraduate education through the completion of their clinical training. The Milestones 2.0 project includes changes made based on experience with Milestones 1.0. METHODS: The ACGME solicited volunteers to participate in the development of subspecialty Milestones 2.0. The workgroup was charged with reviewing/making any additions to the four "Harmonized Milestones", developing subspecialty specific milestones for the Patient Care and Medical Knowledge competencies, and creating a supplemental guide. The Milestones were finalized following review of input from an open comment period. RESULTS: The Cytopathology Milestones 2.0 will go into effect July 2021. They include additional subcompetencies in the 4 harmonized competency areas and cytopathology-specific edits to the patient care and medical knowledge subcompetencies. Although the number of subcompetencies has increased from 18 to 21, within each subcompetency, the number of milestone trajectories has decreased. Additionally, within each subcompetency, the wording has been streamlined. A supplemental guide was created and Milestones 1.0 were compared to 2.0; however, curriculum mapping has been left to programs to develop. CONCLUSIONS: The ultimate goal of the Cytopathology Milestones 2.0 is to provide better real-time documentation of the progress of cytopathology fellows. The expected outcome is to produce highly competent cytopathologists, improving the care they provide, regardless of the program at which they trained.

Impact of education on institutional and faculty rates of atypical squamous cells.

INTRODUCTION: Papanicolaou test quality metrics include the ASC rate, ASC:SIL ratio, and ASC HPV+ rate. What a laboratory should do when metrics show a worrisome trend is not well defined. In 2015, our laboratory noted a worrisome trend in our quality metrics and decided to implement a systemic education program in 2016; we monitored the effectiveness of our program. METHODS: An educational intervention was designed for March/April 2016. Cytotechnologist education consisted of: group meeting on March 10 to discuss metrics, lecture, and written materials on ASC-US criteria, a quiz on challenging ASC-US cases, encouragement to seek consultation, and each cytotechnologist received quarterly individual metrics. The cytopathologist education consisted of: group meeting on April 16 to discuss metrics, encouragement to bring borderline cases to consensus conference, and each faculty received quarterly individual metrics. The ASC rate, ASC:SIL ratio, and ASC HPV+ rate was collected for the institution and each individual faculty in 2016 for January to March (pre-interventions, Q1), April to June (post-interventions, Q2), and July to September (post-interventions, Q3). ASC-H was included in the calculation of ASC %, ASC:SIL, and ASC HPV+ rates. RESULTS: There was a substantial decline in the lab ASC rate and ASC:SIL ratio, and the ASC HPV+ rate increased. Individual faculty changes in ASC:SIL ratio and ASC HPV+ rate also improved. CONCLUSIONS: In our institution, an educational program has been very effective in improving Papanicolaou test metrics. It is helpful to perform re-education at all levels within the department.

Recommendations of the European Advisory Committee of Cytotechnology and European Federation of Cytology Societies for Training and Education of Cytotechnologists in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Faced with changes in cytodiagnostics, cervical cancer screening programs, the introduction and application of new methods, the cytotechnological educational program requires the necessary changes and additions. Insufficient, uneven as well as inaccessible education of cytotechnologists in European countries was the basis for making these recommendations. SUMMARY: The results of previous research and publications related to the currently available education of cytotechnologists in Europe, the needs and suggestions were given by the European Advisory Committee of Cytotechnology (EACC) and European Federation of Cytology Societies (EFCS) for optimal education of future generations of cytotechnologists were used in the preparation of these recommendations. The EACC and EFCS propose a 1-year education and training program divided into 3 modules: gynecological, nongynecological exfoliative, and fine-needle aspiration cytology. Training programs should be organized by an accredited university, preferably a combination of internal education in a cytology laboratory and theoretical education at the university. Cytopathologists and cytotechnologists with at least 5 years of work experience in cytodiagnostics should participate in education. Upon completion of the training program, the EACC and EFCS propose an official name: EFCS certified cytotechnologist. Key Messages: The EACC and EFCS believe that it is extremely important that these recommendations are recognized and implemented by institutions that provide education for cytotechnologists so that they can meet the growing requirements of the profession with their acquired knowledge and competencies.

Multi-omics analysis identifies FoxO1 as a regulator of macrophage function through metabolic reprogramming.

Macrophages are plastic cells that can switch among different states according to bioenergetic or biosynthetic requirements. Our previous work demonstrated that the transcription factor Forkhead Box Protein 1 (FoxO1) plays a pivotal role in regulating the function of macrophages, but the underlying mechanisms are still unclear. Here we identify FoxO1 as a regulator of macrophage function through metabolic reprogramming. Transcriptomic and proteomic analyses showed that the deficiency of FoxO1 results in an alternatively activated (M2) phenotype of macrophages, with lower expression of inflammatory response- and migration-associated genes. Using the high content screening and analysis technology, we found that deletion of FoxO1 in macrophages slows their migration rate and impairs their function to limit tumor cell growth in vitro. Next, we demonstrated that glycolysis is inhibited in FoxO1-deficient macrophages, which leads to the observed functional changes and the reduced tumor suppression capability. This prospective study shows that FoxO1 serves as a bridge between metabolism and macrophage function.

Contribution of the Presenilins in the cell biology, structure and function of γ-secretase.

γ-Secretase cleavage is essential for many biological processes and its dysregulation is linked to disease, including cancer and Alzheimer's disease. Therefore, understanding the regulation of its activity is of major importance to improve drug design and develop novel therapeutics. γ-Secretase belongs to the family of intramembrane cleaving proteases (i-CLiPs), which cleaves its substrates in a process termed regulated intramembrane proteolysis (RIP). During RIP, type-I transmembrane proteins are first cleaved within their ectodomain by a sheddase and then within their transmembrane domain by γ-secretase. γ-Secretase is composed of four integral membrane proteins that are all essential for its function: presenilin (PSEN), anterior pharynx defective 1 (APH1), nicastrin (NCT) and presenilin enhancer 2 (PEN-2). Given the presence of two PSEN homologues (PSEN1 & 2) and several APH1 isoforms, a heterogeneity exists in cellular γ-secretase complexes. It is becoming clear that each of these complexes has overlapping as well as distinct biological characteristics. This review summarizes our current knowledge on complex formation, trafficking, subcellular localization, interactors and the structure of γ-secretase, with a focus, when possible or known, on the contribution of PSEN1 and PSEN2 herein.

The need for a worldwide consensus for cell line authentication: Experience implementing a mandatory requirement at the International Journal of Cancer.

Cell lines are used in life science research worldwide as biological surrogates. All cell lines are subject to major limitations when used as research tools, including (i) cross-contamination with other cells cultured in the same laboratory environment and (ii) evolution in vitro that renders a given cell line inappropriate as a surrogate for a specific biological hypothesis. There is ample evidence that cross-contamination or phenotypic drift of cells in culture can generate irreproducible or misleading data. A small number of scientific journals-the International Journal of Cancer being at the forefront-and funding agencies have recently moved forward to ask for obligatory cell line authentication data. The history of implementing such rules by the International Journal of Cancer exemplifies the difficulties encountered when installing mandatory quality measures in life sciences.

College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference on good laboratory practices in gynecologic cytology: background, rationale, and organization.

CONTEXT: Gynecologic cytopathology is a heavily regulated field, with Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 mandating the collection of many quality metrics. There is a lack of consensus regarding methods to collect, monitor, and benchmark these data and how these data should be used in a quality assurance program. Furthermore, the introduction of human papilloma virus testing and proficiency testing has provided more data to monitor. OBJECTIVE: To determine good laboratory practices in quality assurance of gynecologic cytopathology. DATA SOURCES: Data were collected through a written survey consisting of 98 questions submitted to 1245 Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-licensed or Department of Defense laboratories. There were 541 usable responses. Additional input was sought through a Web posting of results and questions on the College of American Pathologists Web site. Four senior authors who authored the survey and 28 cytopathologists and cytotechnologists were assigned to 5 working groups to analyze data and present statements on good laboratory practices in gynecologic cytopathology at the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference. Ninety-eight attendees at the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference discussed and voted on good laboratory practice statements to obtain consensus. CONCLUSIONS: This paper describes the rationale, background, process, and strengths and limitations of a series of papers that summarize good laboratory practice statements in quality assurance in gynecologic cytopathology.

The role of monitoring interpretive rates, concordance between cytotechnologist and pathologist interpretations before sign-out, and turnaround time in gynecologic cytology quality assurance: findings from the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference working group 1.

CONTEXT: The College of American Pathologists (CAP) conducted a national survey of gynecologic cytology quality assurance (QA) practices. Experts in gynecologic cytology were asked to join 5 working groups that studied the survey data on different aspects of QA. Evaluating the survey data and follow-up questions online, together with a review of pertinent literature, the working groups developed a series of preliminary statements on good laboratory practices in cytology QA. These were presented at a consensus conference and electronic voting occurred. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a set of QA monitors in gynecologic cytology. Working group 1 evaluated (1) monitoring interpretive rate categories for Papanicolaou tests (Pap tests), (2) concordance of cytotechnologist and pathologist interpretations before sign-out, and (3) turnaround time for Pap tests. DATA SOURCES: The statements are based on a survey of gynecologic cytology QA practice patterns and of opinions from working group members and consensus conference attendees. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of this process demonstrate the current state of practice patterns in gynecologic cytology QA. Monitoring interpretive rates for all Bethesda System categories is potentially useful, and it is most useful to monitor interpretive rates for cytotechnologists individually and in comparison to the entire laboratory. Laboratories need to determine what level of discrepancy between cytotechnologist and pathologist interpretations of Pap tests is important to track. Laboratories should consider formalizing procedures and policies to adjudicate such discrepant interpretations. Turnaround time should be monitored in gynecologic cytology, but individual laboratories should determine how to measure and use turnaround time internally.

The role of proficiency testing in ensuring quality: findings from the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference working group 3.

CONTEXT: Implementation of proficiency testing for gynecologic cytology was delayed 20 years because of challenges addressing the subjective nature of cytologic interpretation and replicating normal working conditions. Concern remains regarding test scoring, slide validation, test environment, and other issues. How these test results are, or should be, used in quality management has never been explored. OBJECTIVE: To provide information on good laboratory practices for gynecologic cytology proficiency testing based on findings from the College of American Pathologists' survey-based project funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. DATA SOURCES: An expert working group evaluated results from a Web-based, national laboratory survey plus responses from follow-up questions and findings from the literature. The group created statements on good laboratory practices pertinent to proficiency testing and its role in quality management, which were discussed and voted on at a consensus conference. CONCLUSIONS: Two-thirds of laboratories report having an individual with an unsuccessful proficiency testing score. More than 90% did not initiate any remedial action for 1 or 2 unsuccessful tests; 84% of laboratories reported they actively monitored results from proficiency testing, but most laboratories did not initiate any remedial action for cytotechnologists (81.4%; 376 of 462) or pathologists (87.7%; 405 of 462) who passed a proficiency test but who did not score 100%. Proficiency testing pass-fail rates should be monitored globally for the laboratory and for each individual. Proficiency testing slides should be prescreened by cytotechnologists for pathologists who are not primary screeners. Remedial action should not be required for a passed, but imperfect, test. No remedial action is required for an unsuccessful, first proficiency test result before retesting.

Prospective and retrospective review of gynecologic cytopathology: findings from the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference working group 2.

CONTEXT: Two quality metrics for gynecologic cytology are the subject of this review: "prospective rescreening" and "retrospective rescreening." OBJECTIVE: To offer consensus best practice approaches based on the College of American Pathologists' laboratory-based survey funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. DESIGN: The College of American Pathologists submitted a paper-based survey to 1245 laboratories. After review of initial results, follow-up Web-based survey results, and a literature review, consensus best practice statements were presented at a national consensus conference. These statements were discussed and voted upon by conference participants. Results.-A total of 541 laboratories responded to survey questions about prospective and retrospective rescreening. Most laboratories (>85%) prospectively rescreen more than 10% of Pap tests interpreted as negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy. Most (72%) report inclusion of less than 20% high-risk cases. Most laboratories use multiple measures to define "high risk." Most laboratories (96.2%) retrospectively rescreen Pap tests from the preceding 5 years only. In most laboratories (71.4%) only Pap test results with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or worse prompt retrospective review. CONCLUSIONS: The number of Pap tests from high-risk patients should be maximized in prospective and retrospective rescreening. Unsatisfactory Pap tests should also be included. All readily identifiable high-risk human papillomavirus-positive cases with an interpretation of negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy should be prospectively rescreened. Cervical biopsy results with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or worse (CIN 2+) should trigger retrospective rescreening. Regular feedback should be provided to cytotechnologists and cytopathologists. Upgraded diagnoses from negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy to atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, should be monitored.

General quality practices in gynecologic cytopathology: findings from the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference working group 3.

CONTEXT: There are many long-standing quality monitors for cytopathology laboratories and their cytotechnologists and pathologists. Many of these monitors are based on tradition and empirical good intentions. There is no established standard as to how results of these monitors should be used in a quality assurance program. OBJECTIVE: To review practices that are typically part of a general quality program in cytopathology laboratories and to provide statements regarding good laboratory practices that laboratories may find useful in a quality assurance program in their own setting. DATA SOURCES: An expert working group evaluated results from a national laboratory survey, responses from follow-up questions posted on a Web site, and findings from the literature. The group created statements on good laboratory practices related to general quality practices and quality assurance in gynecologic cytopathology. These were discussed and voted on at a consensus conference. CONCLUSIONS: Laboratories follow many metrics. Most laboratories facilitate comparison of individual metrics against the laboratory's metrics: 81.1% for cytotechnologists and 59.6% for pathologists. The majority of laboratories facilitate comparison of individual cytotechnologist metrics with other cytotechnologists, but less frequently metrics from pathologists with other individuals. The most common methods to recognize variance in performance in individuals were by identifying outliers from the data or by user-defined action limits. The most common method to address variance was an attempt to identify the cause of the variance and conduct a focused review. Quality metrics should be monitored for the laboratory as a whole and in selected cases for both individual pathologists and cytotechnologists. Results should be shared with individuals, and newly hired primary screeners should be monitored. Reviewing selected cases is a useful quality tool. Low-volume methodologies, such as conventional Papanicolaou tests, should have additional oversight.

Quality improvement opportunities in gynecologic cytologic-histologic correlations: findings from the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference working group 4.

CONTEXT: Cytopathology experts, interested stakeholders, and representatives from the College of American Pathologists, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Society of Cytopathology, the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology, the American Society for Clinical Pathology, and the American Society of Cytotechnology convened the Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference to present preliminary consensus statements developed by working groups, including the Cytologic-Histologic Correlations Working Group 4, using results from surveys and literature review. Conference participants voted on statements, suggested changes where consensus was not achieved, and voted on proposed changes. OBJECTIVES: To document existing practices in gynecologic cytologic-histologic correlation, to develop consensus statements on appropriate practices, to explore standardization, and to suggest improvement in these practices. DATA SOURCES: The material is based on survey results from 546 US laboratories, review of the literature from 1988 to 2011, and the College of American Pathologists Web site for consensus comments and additional survey questions. CONCLUSIONS: Cytologic-histologic correlations can be performed retrospectively, during initial case review, or both. At minimum, all available slides should be reviewed for a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion Papanicolaou test with negative biopsies. The preferred monitor for correlations is the positive predictive value of a Papanicolaou test. Laboratories should design cytologic-histologic correlation programs to explore existing or perceived quality deficiencies.

Monitoring and ordering practices for human papillomavirus in cervical cytology: findings from the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference working group 5.

CONTEXT: The association of certain types of human papillomavirus with cervical carcinoma is well established. Human papillomavirus testing is now routinely used to screen for cervical carcinoma and precursor lesions of the cervix (cotesting and reflex testing) and these results are considered in patient triage and management. OBJECTIVE: To provide information about current laboratory practices in human papillomavirus testing and consensus best practice statements based on results from the College of American Pathologists' laboratory-based survey funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. DESIGN: The College of American Pathologists submitted a paper-based survey to 1245 laboratories in the United States. After review of the initial results, follow-up Web-based survey results, and a literature review by an expert working group, consensus best practice statements were constructed by working group members for presentation at a national consensus conference. These best practice statements were discussed and then voted upon by conference participants. RESULTS: A total of 525 laboratories responded to survey questions about human papillomavirus ordering and monitoring practices, whereas 546 responded to the overall survey. In most laboratories (87.6%), the high-risk human papillomavirus test is ordered as a reflex test by providers. A minority of laboratories (11.9%) routinely bundle low- and high-risk human papillomavirus tests. Most laboratories (84.4%) do not limit testing in patients with atypical squamous cells to women older than 20 years. More than half of laboratories (53.3%) monitor human papillomavirus positive rates in Papanicolaou tests with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. CONCLUSIONS: It is not appropriate for laboratories to offer low-risk human papillomavirus testing for any clinical circumstance in gynecologic cytology. Laboratories should not order human papillomavirus testing to resolve diagnostic discrepancies. It is a valuable broad measure of laboratory quality to monitor the human papillomavirus-positive rates in Papanicolaou tests with atypical squamous cells.