The cost-saving effect of centralized histological reviews with soft tissue and visceral sarcomas, GIST, and desmoid tumors: The experiences of the pathologists of the French Sarcoma Group.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the types of discordance occurring in the diagnosis of soft tissue and visceral sarcomas, gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), and desmoid tumors, as well as the economic impact of diagnostic discrepancies. METHODS: We carried out a retrospective, multicenter analysis using prospectively implemented databases performed on a cohort of patients within the French RRePS network in 2010. Diagnoses were deemed to be discordant based on the 2013 World Health Organization (WHO) classification. Predictive factors of discordant diagnoses were explored. A decision tree was used to assess the expected costs of two strategies of disease management: one based on revised diagnoses after centralized histological review (option 1), the other on diagnoses without centralized review (option 2). Both were defined based on the patient and the disease characteristics, according to national or international guidelines. The time horizon was 12 months and the perspective of the French National Health Insurance (NHI) was retained. Costs were expressed in Euros for 2013. Sensitivity analyses were performed using low and high scenarios that included ± 20% estimates for cost. RESULTS: A total of 2,425 patients were included. Three hundred forty-one patients (14%) had received discordant diagnoses. These discordances were determined to mainly be benign tumors diagnosed as sarcomas (n = 124), or non-sarcoma malignant tumors diagnosed as sarcomas (n = 77). The probability of discordance was higher for a final diagnosis of desmoid tumors when compared to liposarcomas (odds ratio = 5.1; 95%CI [2.6-10.4]). The expected costs per patient for the base-case analysis (low- and high-case scenarios) amounted to €8,791 (€7,033 and €10,549, respectively) for option 1 and €8,904 (€7,057 and €10,750, respectively) for option 2. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight misdiagnoses of sarcomas, which were found to most often be confused with benign tumors. Centralized histological reviews are likely to provide cost-savings for the French NHI.

Grading of soft tissue sarcomas: from histological to molecular assessment.

Several histological grading systems for soft tissue sarcomas have been described since the early 1980s. Their main objective is to select patients for adjuvant chemotherapy. Two histological grading systems are used in daily practice, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the French Federation of Cancer Centers Sarcoma Group (FNCLCC) systems. They have been devised by combining histological parameters: number of mitoses per high-power field, the presence of necrosis, cellular and nuclear morphology and the degree of cellularity for the NCI grading; and tumour differentiation, mitotic index and extent of necrosis for the French system. Histological grading is far more appropriate to assess the risk of metastasis. However, several limitations prevent its use: grade cannot be applied to all histological types, its reproducibility is not perfect, a three-grade system generates an intermediate grade with undetermined prognosis, and finally the core needle biopsy, now widely used for the diagnosis of soft tissue sarcoma, is not the best sample to assess the grade. The development of molecular grading in addition to histological grading probably represents the next step. Molecular signatures based on quantitative evaluation of chromosomal complexity such as CINSARC (complexity index in sarcomas) appear as a strong independent predictive factor for metastasis in several types of sarcoma, and even in several other types of cancer. When they can be instituted in daily practice on formalin fixed, paraffin embedded material, molecular signatures will not only provide information on risk of metastasis, but also better understanding of cancer development, response or resistance to evaluated drugs, and potential targets for future treatments.