Immunohistochemistry for Diagnosing Melanoma in Older Adults.

Importance: Pathologic assessment to diagnose skin biopsies, especially for cutaneous melanoma, can be challenging, and immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining has the potential to aid decision-making. Currently, the temporal trends regarding the use of IHC for the examination of skin biopsies on a national level have not been described. Objective: To illustrate trends in the use of IHC for the examination of skin biopsies in melanoma diagnoses. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted to examine incident cases of melanoma diagnosed between January 2000 and December 2017. The analysis used the SEER-Medicare linked database, incorporating data from 17 population-based registries. The study focused on incident cases of in situ or malignant melanoma of the skin diagnosed in patients 65 years or older. Data were analyzed between August 2022 and November 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes encompassed the identification of claims for IHC within the month of melanoma diagnoses and extending up to 14 days into the month following diagnosis. The SEER data on patients with melanoma comprised demographic, tumor, and area-level characteristics. Results: The final sample comprised 132 547 melanoma tumors in 116 117 distinct patients. Of the 132 547 melanoma diagnoses meeting inclusion criteria from 2000 to 2017, 43 396 cases had accompanying IHC claims (33%). Among these cases, 28 298 (65%) were diagnosed in male patients, 19 019 (44%) were diagnosed in patients aged 65 years to 74 years, 16 444 (38%) in patients aged 75 years to 84 years, and 7933 (18%) in patients aged 85 years and older. In 2000, 11% of melanoma cases had claims for IHC at or near the time of diagnosis. This proportion increased yearly, with 51% of melanoma cases having associated IHC claims in 2017. Increasing IHC use is observed for all stages of melanoma, including in situ melanoma. Claims for IHC in melanomas increased in all 17 SEER registries but at different rates. In 2017, the use of IHC for melanoma diagnosis ranged from 39% to 68% across registries. Conclusions and Relevance: Considering the dramatically rising and variable use of IHC in diagnosing melanoma by pathologists demonstrated in this retrospective cross-sectional study, further investigation is warranted to understand the clinical utility and discern when IHC most improves diagnostic accuracy or helps patients.

Implementing the Melanocytic Pathology Assessment Tool and Hierarchy for Diagnosis: Long-term effect of a simple educational intervention.

Background: A standardized pathology management tool for melanocytic skin lesions may improve patient care by simplifying interpretation and categorization of the diverse terminology currently extant. Objective: To assess an online educational intervention that teaches dermatopathologists to use the Melanocytic Pathology Assessment Tool and Hierarchy for Diagnosis (MPATH-Dx), a schema collapsing multiple diagnostic terms into 5 classes ranging from benign to invasive melanoma. Methods: Practicing dermatopathologists (N = 149) from 40 US states participated in a 2-year educational intervention study (71% response rate). The intervention involved a brief tutorial followed by practice on 28 melanocytic lesions, with the goal of teaching pathologists how to correctly use the MPATH-Dx schema; competence using the MPATH-Dx tool 12-24 months postintervention was assessed. Participants' self-reported confidence using the MPATH-Dx tool was assessed preintervention and postintervention. Results: At preintervention, confidence using the MPATH-Dx tool was already high, despite 68% lacking prior familiarity with it, and confidence increased postintervention (P = .0003). During the intervention, participants used the MPATH-Dx tool correctly for 90% of their interpretations; postintervention, participants used the MPATH-Dx tool correctly for 88% of their interpretations. Limitations: Future research should examine implementing a standardized pathology assessment schema in actual clinical practice. Conclusion: Dermatopathologists can be taught to confidently and competently use the MPATH-Dx schema with a simple educational tutorial followed by practice.

Revision of the Melanocytic Pathology Assessment Tool and Hierarchy for Diagnosis Classification Schema for Melanocytic Lesions: A Consensus Statement.

Importance: A standardized pathology classification system for melanocytic lesions is needed to aid both pathologists and clinicians in cataloging currently existing diverse terminologies and in the diagnosis and treatment of patients. The Melanocytic Pathology Assessment Tool and Hierarchy for Diagnosis (MPATH-Dx) has been developed for this purpose. Objective: To revise the MPATH-Dx version 1.0 classification tool, using feedback from dermatopathologists participating in the National Institutes of Health-funded Reducing Errors in Melanocytic Interpretations (REMI) Study and from members of the International Melanoma Pathology Study Group (IMPSG). Evidence Review: Practicing dermatopathologists recruited from 40 US states participated in the 2-year REMI study and provided feedback on the MPATH-Dx version 1.0 tool. Independently, member dermatopathologists participating in an IMPSG workshop dedicated to the MPATH-Dx schema provided additional input for refining the MPATH-Dx tool. A reference panel of 3 dermatopathologists, the original authors of the MPATH-Dx version 1.0 tool, integrated all feedback into an updated and refined MPATH-Dx version 2.0. Findings: The new MPATH-Dx version 2.0 schema simplifies the original 5-class hierarchy into 4 classes to improve diagnostic concordance and to provide more explicit guidance in the treatment of patients. This new version also has clearly defined histopathological criteria for classification of classes I and II lesions; has specific provisions for the most frequently encountered low-cumulative sun damage pathway of melanoma progression, as well as other, less common World Health Organization pathways to melanoma; provides guidance for classifying intermediate class II tumors vs melanoma; and recognizes a subset of pT1a melanomas with very low risk and possible eventual reclassification as neoplasms lacking criteria for melanoma. Conclusions and Relevance: The implementation of the newly revised MPATH-Dx version 2.0 schema into clinical practice is anticipated to provide a robust tool and adjunct for standardized diagnostic reporting of melanocytic lesions and management of patients to the benefit of both health care practitioners and patients.

Association of Second-Opinion Strategies in the Histopathologic Diagnosis of Cutaneous Melanocytic Lesions With Diagnostic Accuracy and Population-Level Costs.

IMPORTANCE: Diagnostic variation among pathologists interpreting cutaneous melanocytic lesions could lead to suboptimal care. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the potential association of second-opinion strategies in the histopathologic diagnosis of cutaneous melanocytic lesions with diagnostic accuracy and 1-year population-level costs in the US. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Decision analysis with 1-year time horizon including melanocytic lesion diagnoses available from US pathologists participating in the Melanoma Pathology Study (M-Path) and from the study panel of reference pathologists who classified cases using the MPATH-Dx classification tool. M-Path data collection occurred from July 2013 through March 2015; analyses for the present study were performed between April 2015 and January 2021. EXPOSURES: Various second-opinion strategies for interpretation of melanocytic cutaneous lesions. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Estimated accuracy of pathologists' diagnoses, defined as concordance with the reference panel diagnoses, and 1-year postbiopsy medical costs under various second-opinion strategies. Expected percentage of concordant diagnoses, including percentages of overinterpretation and underinterpretation, and 1-year costs of medical care per 100 000 in the US population. RESULTS: Decision-analytic model parameters were based on diagnostic interpretations for 240 cases by 187 pathologists compared with reference panel diagnoses. Without second opinions, 83.2% of diagnoses in the US were estimated to be accurate-ie, concordant with the reference diagnosis; with overinterpretation (8.0%) or underinterpretation (8.8%), and 16 850 misclassified diagnoses per 100 000 biopsies. Accuracy increased under all second-opinion strategies. Accuracy (87.4% concordance with 3.6% overinterpretation and 9.1% underinterpretation) and cost (an increase of more than $10 million per 100 000 biopsies per year) were highest when second opinions were universal (eg, performed on all biopsies), relative to no second opinions. A selective second-opinion strategy based on pathologists' desire or institutional requirements for a second opinion was most accurate (86.5% concordance; 4.4% overinterpretation; 9.1% underinterpretation) and would reduce costs by more than $1.9 million per 100 000 skin biopsies relative to no second opinions. Improvements in diagnostic accuracy with all second-opinion strategies were associated with reductions in overinterpretation but not underinterpretation. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this decision-analytic model, selective second-opinion strategies for interpretation of melanocytic skin lesions showed the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy and decrease costs relative to no second opinions or universal second opinions.

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.

Assessment of Second-Opinion Strategies for Diagnoses of Cutaneous Melanocytic Lesions.

Importance: Histopathologic criteria have limited diagnostic reliability for a range of cutaneous melanocytic lesions. Objective: To evaluate the association of second-opinion strategies by general pathologists and dermatopathologists with the overall reliability of diagnosis of difficult melanocytic lesions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This diagnostic study used samples from the Melanoma Pathology Study, which comprises 240 melanocytic lesion samples selected from a dermatopathology laboratory in Bellevue, Washington, and represents the full spectrum of lesions from common nevi to invasive melanoma. Five sets of 48 samples were evaluated independently by 187 US pathologists from July 15, 2013, through May 23, 2016. Data analysis was performed from April 2016 through November 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Accuracy of diagnosis, defined as concordance with an expert consensus diagnosis of 3 experienced pathologists, was assessed after applying 10 different second-opinion strategies. Results: Among the 187 US pathologists examining the 24 lesion samples, 113 were general pathologists (65 men [57.5%]; mean age at survey, 53.7 years [range, 33.0-79.0 years]) and 74 were dermatopathologists (49 men [66.2%]; mean age at survey, 46.4 years [range, 33.0-77.0 years]). Among the 8976 initial case interpretations, physicians desired second opinions for 3899 (43.4%), most often for interpretation of severely dysplastic nevi. The overall misclassification rate was highest when interpretations did not include second opinions and initial reviewers were all general pathologists lacking subspecialty training (52.8%; 95% CI, 51.3%-54.3%). When considering different second opinion strategies, the misclassification of melanocytic lesions was lowest when the first, second, and third consulting reviewers were subspecialty-trained dermatopathologists and when all lesions were subject to second opinions (36.7%; 95% CI, 33.1%-40.7%). When the second opinion strategies were compared with single interpretations without second opinions, the reductions in misclassification rates for some of the strategies were statistically significant, but none of the strategies eliminated diagnostic misclassification. Melanocytic lesions in the middle of the diagnostic spectrum had the highest misclassification rates (eg, moderately or severely dysplastic nevus, Spitz nevus, melanoma in situ, and pathologic stage [p]T1a invasive melanoma). Variability of in situ and thin invasive melanoma was relatively intractable to all examined strategies. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this study suggest that second opinions rendered by dermatopathologists improve reliability of melanocytic lesion diagnosis. However, discordance among pathologists remained high.

Influence of variability in assessment of Breslow thickness, mitotic rate and ulceration among US pathologists interpreting invasive melanoma, for the purpose of AJCC staging.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma staging has depended on depth of invasion (Breslow thickness, BT), mitotic rate (MR) and ulceration. In anticipation of the AJCC's eighth edition, variability in pathologists' assessment of these factors and consequently in tumor staging was assessed. METHODS: One-hundred and fifteen cases of invasive melanoma, established by a consensus panel, were assessed by 187 pathologists. Variation was studied in BT, the detection of mitotic figures, and ulceration. The sources of this variation and its effect on tumor staging are considered. RESULTS: On average, participant assessments closely approached consensus BT. Greater variation was identified in the classification of mitogenicity, which (like ulceration) upstages a T1 melanoma from T1a to T1b in the seventh but not eighth edition. In cases with a T1a diagnosis by the consensus panel, 15.6% of participants identified one or more mitotic figures (indicative of a false positive); and in cases diagnosed asT1b by the consensus panel, 32.0% of participants failed to find mitotic figures (false negative). CONCLUSION: Variability in the staging of T1 melanoma among pathologists when using the AJCC seventh edition criteria is closely related to the detection of mitotic figures, with BT playing a less prominent role. Decreased variability is expected after implementation of the eighth edition.

Evaluation of the Melanocytic Pathology Assessment Tool and Hierarchy for Diagnosis (MPATH-Dx) classification scheme for diagnosis of cutaneous melanocytic neoplasms: Results from the International Melanoma Pathology Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Pathologists use diverse terminology when interpreting melanocytic neoplasms, potentially compromising quality of care. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the Melanocytic Pathology Assessment Tool and Hierarchy for Diagnosis (MPATH-Dx) scheme, a 5-category classification system for melanocytic lesions. METHODS: Participants (n = 16) of the 2013 International Melanoma Pathology Study Group Workshop provided independent case-level diagnoses and treatment suggestions for 48 melanocytic lesions. Individual diagnoses (including, when necessary, least and most severe diagnoses) were mapped to corresponding MPATH-Dx classes. Interrater agreement and correlation between MPATH-Dx categorization and treatment suggestions were evaluated. RESULTS: Most participants were board-certified dermatopathologists (n = 15), age 50 years or older (n = 12), male (n = 9), based in the United States (n = 11), and primary academic faculty (n = 14). Overall, participants generated 634 case-level diagnoses with treatment suggestions. Mean weighted kappa coefficients for diagnostic agreement after MPATH-Dx mapping (assuming least and most severe diagnoses, when necessary) were 0.70 (95% confidence interval 0.68-0.71) and 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.71-0.73), respectively, whereas correlation between MPATH-Dx categorization and treatment suggestions was 0.91. LIMITATIONS: This was a small sample size of experienced pathologists in a testing situation. CONCLUSION: Varying diagnostic nomenclature can be classified into a concise hierarchy using the MPATH-Dx scheme. Further research is needed to determine whether this classification system can facilitate diagnostic concordance in general pathology practice and improve patient care.

How concerns and experiences with medical malpractice affect dermatopathologists' perceptions of their diagnostic practices when interpreting cutaneous melanocytic lesions.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify characteristics associated with past malpractice lawsuits and how malpractice concerns may affect interpretive practices. METHODS: We surveyed 207 of 301 (68.8%) eligible dermatopathologists who interpret melanocytic skin lesions in 10 states. The survey assessed dermatopathologists' demographic and clinical practice characteristics, perceptions of how medical malpractice concerns could influence their interpretive practices, and past malpractice lawsuits. RESULTS: Of dermatopathologists, 33% reported past malpractice experiences. Factors associated with being sued included older age (57 vs 48 years, P < .001), lack of board certification or fellowship training in dermatopathology (76.5% vs 53.2%, P = .001), and greater number of years interpreting melanocytic lesions (>20 years: 52.9% vs 20.1%, P < .001). Of participants, 64% reported being moderately or extremely confident in their melanocytic interpretations. Although most dermatopathologists believed that malpractice concerns increased their likelihood of ordering specialized pathology tests, obtaining recuts, and seeking a second opinion, none of these practices were associated with past malpractice. Most dermatopathologists reported concerns about potential harms to patients that may result from their assessments of melanocytic lesions. LIMITATIONS: Limitations of this study include lack of validation of and details about the malpractice suits experienced by participating dermatopathologists. In addition, the study assessed perceptions of practice rather than actual practices that might be associated with malpractice incidents. CONCLUSIONS: Most dermatopathologists reported apprehension about how malpractice affects their clinical practice and are concerned about patient safety irrespective of whether they had actually experienced a medical malpractice suit.