Practical Considerations in Clinical Pathology Data Interpretation and Description.

Although interpretation and description of clinical pathology test results for any preclinical safety assessment study should employ a consistent standard approach, companies differ regarding that approach and the appearance of the end product. Some rely heavily on statistical analysis, others do not. Some believe reference intervals are important, most do not. Some prefer severity of effects be described by percentage differences from, or multiples of, baseline or control, others prefer only word modifiers. Some expect a definitive decision for every potential effect, others accept uncertainty. This commentary addresses these differences and underscores the need for flexibility in a "consistent standard approach" because the conditions of every study are unique. This article constitutes an overview of material originally presented at Session 2 of the 2016 Society of Toxicologic Pathology Annual Symposium.

Multidisciplinarity and medical decision, impact for patients with cancer: sociological assessment of two tumour committees' organization.

PURPOSE: Medical practices in oncology are expected to be multidisciplinary, yet few articles studied how this may be concretely applied. In the present study, we evaluated the organization of two multidisciplinary committees, one for breast cancer and one for sarcoma, in a French Comprehensive Cancer Centre. METHODS: Both tumours were specifically chosen so as to emphasise substantial differences in relation with incidence, histological subtypes, management strategy, and scientific evidence. Between 2003 and 2004, 404 decision processes were observed, 210 for sarcoma (26 meetings) and 194 for breast cancer (10 meetings). The number of physicians who took part in the discussions and their medical specialties were systematically noted as well as the number of contradictory discussions, medical specialties represented in these contradictory discussions and the topics of contradiction. The last measured data was whether the final committee's decision was in conformity with the referent preferences or not. All these measures were related to the referent's medical speciality and working place, to the stage of the disease and to the disease management stage. RESULTS: Committees' specificities concerned their organization, referent's medical specialties, the number of participants in discussions and their medical specialties. Discussions in the sarcoma committee tended to be more multidisciplinary, involving more specialties. Initial strategy proposal for one patient was modified during the discussions for 86 patients out of 210 (41%) and for 62 out of 194 (32%) respectively for sarcoma and breast cancer. However, there was no significant difference in the rate of contradictory discussions between breast cancer and sarcoma committees (32% versus 41% respectively; P = 0.08). The rates of contradictory discussions were similar for localized cancers, local relapse and metastasis disease (37%, 41% and 34% respectively; P = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: The present study reports more than 30% of changes concerning strategy for patient with cancer due to multidisciplinary discussions. This indicates that, providing tumour committees are adapted to the pathologies' characteristics, they can promote a collective and multidisciplinary approach to oncology.

Pathology databanking and biobanking in The Netherlands, a central role for PALGA, the nationwide histopathology and cytopathology data network and archive.

Since 1991, a nationwide histopathology and cytopathology network and archive is in operation in The Netherlands under the name PALGA, encompassing all sixty-four pathology laboratories in The Netherlands. The overall system comprises decentralized systems at the participating laboratories, a central databank, and a dedicated communication and information exchange tool. Excerpts of all histopathology and cytopathology reports are generated automatically at the participating laboratories and transferred to the central databank. Both the decentralized systems and the central system perform checks on the quality and completeness of excerpts. Currently, about 42 million records on almost 10 million patients are stored in the central databank. Each excerpt contains patient identifiers, including demographic data and the so-called PALGA diagnosis. The latter is structured along five classification axes: topography, morphology, function, procedure, and diseases. All data transfer and communication occurs electronically with encryption of patient and laboratory identifiers. All excerpts are continuously available to all participating pathology laboratories, thus contributing to the quality of daily patient care. In addition, external parties may obtain permission to use data from the PALGA system, either on an ongoing basis or on the basis of a specific permission. Annually, 40 to 60 applications for permission to use PALGA data are submitted. Among external users are the Dutch cancer registry, population-based screening programs for cancer of the uterine cervix and breast cancer in The Netherlands, and individual investigators addressing a range of research questions. Many scientific papers and theses incorporating PALGA data have been published already. In conclusion, the PALGA system is a unique system that requires a minimal effort on the part of the participating laboratories, while providing them a powerful tool in their daily practices.