Data set for the reporting of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma: recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR).

Optimal patient management benefits from comprehensive and accurate pathology reports that contribute to cancer staging and prognostication. Proforma reports are used in many countries, but these vary in their structure and implementation. The International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR) is an alliance formed by the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia, the Royal College of Pathologists of the United Kingdom, the College of American Pathologists, the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer the European Society of Pathology and the American Society of Clinical Pathology (ASCP), with the aim of developing an evidence-based reporting data set for each cancer site. It is argued that this should reduce the global burden of cancer data set development and reduplication of effort by different international institutions that commission, publish and maintain standardised cancer reporting data sets. The resultant standardisation of cancer reporting will benefit not only those countries directly involved in the collaboration but also others not in a position to develop their own data sets. We describe the development of a cancer data set by the ICCR expert panel for the reporting of the main malignant liver tumours: intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma and present the 'required' and 'recommended' elements to be included in the report with an explanatory commentary. This data set incorporates definitions and classifications in the most recent World Health Organisation (WHO) publication on hepatic malignancies (4th edition) and the recently published tumour-node-metastasis (TNM)8 staging system. Widespread adoption and implementation of this data set will enable consistent and accurate data collection, comparison of epidemiological and pathological parameters between different populations, facilitate research and ultimately result in better patient outcomes.

Diagnostic pathology of lymphoproliferative disorders.

The last 20 years have seen a dramatic change in the way we classify, and therefore diagnose, lymphoma. Two decades ago, the International Working Formulation enabled diagnosis and management on the basis of H&E sections alone, with no mandatory requirement for immunophenotyping, molecular studies or any other ancillary investigations. The concept of categorisation by 'clinicopathological entities' defined by clinical features, morphology, immunophenotype and more recently, genotype, began with the Kiel, and Lukes and Collins classifications in the late 1970s, becoming fully expressed in the REAL and subsequently WHO classifications. The current, multidisciplinary approach to categorisation adds significantly to the task facing the anatomical pathologist, since it requires distribution of biopsy material to all the appropriate specialised laboratories, the gathering of a range of cross-disciplinary information, the correlation of all diagnostic findings, deduction of a definitive diagnosis and, finally, integration of all the above into a single multiparameter report. In this review, we summarise the contemporary approach to the biopsy, diagnosis and reporting of lymphoproliferative disorders.

The role of molecular studies in lymphoma diagnosis: a review.

Lymphoma classification is based on a multiparametric approach to diagnosis, in which clinical features, morphology, immunophenotype, karyotype and molecular characteristics are important to varying degrees. While in most cases, a diagnosis can be confidently established on the basis of morphology and immunophenotype alone, a small proportion of diagnostically difficult cases will rely on molecular studies to enable a definitive diagnosis. This review discusses the various molecular techniques available including Southern blotting (SB), polymerase chain reaction (PCR), fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH)--including multicolour-FISH/spectral karyotyping and comparative genomic hybridisation--and also gene expression profiling using cDNA microarray technology. Emphasis is given to the analysis of antigen receptor gene rearrangements and chromosomal translocations as they relate to lymphoma diagnosis and also in the setting of minimal residual disease (MRD) detection and monitoring. Laboratories performing these tests need to have expertise in these areas of testing, and there is a need for greater standardisation of molecular tests. It is important to know the sensitivity and specificity of each test as well as its limitations and the pitfalls in the interpretation of results. Above all, results of molecular testing should never be considered in isolation, and must always be interpreted in the context of clinical and other laboratory data.

Data set for pathology reporting of cutaneous invasive melanoma: recommendations from the international collaboration on cancer reporting (ICCR).

An accurate and complete pathology report is critical for the optimal management of cutaneous melanoma patients. Protocols for the pathologic reporting of melanoma have been independently developed by the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia (RCPA), Royal College of Pathologists (United Kingdom) (RCPath), and College of American Pathologists (CAP). In this study, data sets, checklists, and structured reporting protocols for pathologic examination and reporting of cutaneous melanoma were analyzed by an international panel of melanoma pathologists and clinicians with the aim of developing a common, internationally agreed upon, evidence-based data set. The International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting cutaneous melanoma expert review panel analyzed the existing RCPA, RCPath, and CAP data sets to develop a protocol containing "required" (mandatory/core) and "recommended" (nonmandatory/noncore) elements. Required elements were defined as those that had agreed evidentiary support at National Health and Medical Research Council level III-2 level of evidence or above and that were unanimously agreed upon by the review panel to be essential for the clinical management, staging, or assessment of the prognosis of melanoma or fundamental for pathologic diagnosis. Recommended elements were those considered to be clinically important and recommended for good practice but with lesser degrees of supportive evidence. Sixteen core/required data elements for cutaneous melanoma pathology reports were defined (with an additional 4 core/required elements for specimens received with lymph nodes). Eighteen additional data elements with a lesser level of evidentiary support were included in the recommended data set. Consensus response values (permitted responses) were formulated for each data item. Development and agreement of this evidence-based protocol at an international level was accomplished in a timely and efficient manner, and the processes described herein may facilitate the development of protocols for other tumor types. Widespread utilization of an internationally agreed upon, structured pathology data set for melanoma will lead not only to improved patient management but is a prerequisite for research and for international benchmarking in health care.