Assessing ROSE for adequacy of EBUS-TBNA compared with a direct-to-cell block approach as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) has been used during the endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) procedure as standard practice. Because of the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, our institute had had to discontinue ROSE and adopt a direct-to-cell block approach. In the present study, we aimed to determine whether this change has had significant effects on the cytopathology quality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 1903 EBUS-TBNA cases from 734 patients were collected (1097 cases with ROSE for 452 patients; 806 cases without ROSE but with direct-to-cell block for 282 patients). The clinical and cytology data were analyzed using SAS, version 9.4, software to render calculated standardized residuals and a fitted multivariate generalized linear model. RESULTS: On average, a biopsy from a patient with ROSE was 0.936 (=exp -0.066) times less likely to be reported as satisfactory compared with a biopsy from a patient without ROSE, although the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.785). The inadequacy rate of EBUS-TBNA was 6.4% higher on average for cases with ROSE compared with a direct-to-cell block approach. However, this difference was also not statistically significant. The proportions of biopsies reported as diagnostic for malignancy and other were significantly different between the ROSE and no-ROSE groups with a standardized residual of 1.80 (P = 0.036) and -2.27 (P = 0.012), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Discontinuing ROSE and using a direct-to-cell block approach had no negative effects on cytopathology quality. This practice can be considered acceptable during the COVID-19 pandemic when social distancing and the shortage of staff and supplies have resulted in challenges to delivering quality care to cancer patients whose treatment cannot be postponed.

Comparison of the Mutational Profiles of Primary Myelofibrosis, Polycythemia Vera, and Essential Thrombocytosis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the mutational profiles of patients with primary myelofibrosis (PMF), polycythemia vera (PV), and essential thrombocytosis (ET). METHODS: Next-generation sequencing results of 75 cases of PMF, 33 cases of PV, and 27 cases of ET were compared. RESULTS: Mutation rates of ASXL1 and SRSF2 were significantly higher in PMF than in PV or ET. ASXL1 mutations appeared to be more frequently associated with risk of transformation to acute myeloid leukemia than JAK2 or TET2 mutations. The most common mutation-cytogenetic combinations in myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) were mutations of JAK2 or ASXL1 with del(20q) and were more common in patients with PMF and PV than in patients with ET. Differences were also found between patients with PMF and PV. CONCLUSIONS: PMF, PV, and ET show different mutational profiles, which may be helpful in resolving the differential diagnosis between MPNs. Due to the relatively small number of cases and variable testing over time, larger controlled studies are necessary to confirm the findings.