Results from the 2019 American Society of Cytopathology survey on rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE)-part 2: subjective views among the cytopathology community.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to improve understanding of the cytopathology community's perspective regarding the value of rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE) in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The American Society of Cytopathology membership was surveyed in 2019 to obtain subjective data on the cytopathology community's perceptions regarding ROSE. Comments were categorized by major themes and attitudes and analyzed by respondent's role in laboratory, practice size, and practice setting (Fisher's exact and χ2 tests). RESULTS: A total of 541 responses were received from 255 cytopathologists/pathologists, 261 cytotechnologists, 19 trainees, and 6 others (as previously reported). Reasons for which cytopathology personnel provide this service aligned with their perceptions of why clinicians request ROSE. A minority of respondents, disproportionally from high volume centers, felt ROSE is unnecessary. Overall attitude regarding ROSE was generally positive. There were no significant differences in attitude regarding ROSE according to role in laboratory or practice size, but respondents from academic centers provided a significantly higher percentage of positive comments than those in private or community practice. Although survey respondents generally felt that ROSE is valuable to patient care, they also highlighted several challenges, including staffing, time commitment, and inadequate reimbursement. Implementation of telecytology was felt to potentially alleviate some of these challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Survey results show that the cytology community views ROSE favorably, practices vary considerably, and there is a perceived need for improved reimbursement. Data from this study may be used to identify areas that warrant additional research to clarify the clinical value of ROSE.

Results from the 2019 American Society of Cytopathology survey on rapid on-site evaluation-Part 1: objective practice patterns.

INTRODUCTION: Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) is a service provided by cytologists that helps ensure specimen adequacy and appropriate triage for ancillary testing. However, data on the current usage patterns across different practice settings have been lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To obtain an accurate and timely assessment of the current state of practice of ROSE, a 14-question online survey was constructed by the Clinical Practice Committee of the American Society for Cytopathology. The survey was available to the membership of the American Society for Cytopathology for a 3-week period in early 2019. RESULTS: A total of 541 responses were received, including from 255 cytopathologists/pathologists, 261 cytotechnologists, 19 cytology resident/fellow trainees, and 6 others. ROSE was offered as a clinical service by 95.4% of the respondents, with telecytology for ROSE used in 21.9% of the practices. Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration was the procedure most frequently reported to use ROSE (mean, 59.1%; median, 70%). Cytotechnologists were involved in ROSE in most practices. The number of daily ROSE procedures correlated with the annual nongynecologic cytology volumes. Approximately 70% of ROSE procedures were reported to require >30 minutes, on average, for the cytologist. CONCLUSIONS: The results from our survey of cytologists have shown that the reported practice patterns for the usage of ROSE vary considerably. The presented data can help inform future guideline recommendations and the implementation of ROSE in different clinical settings.

Incorporation of Digital Gene Expression Profiling for Cell-of-Origin Determination (Lymph2Cx Testing) into the Routine Work-Up of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

Diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL) represent a clinically heterogeneous group of lymphomas that are classified together based on similarities in morphology and immunophenotype. Gene expression profiling further classifies DLBCL into distinct molecular subgroups based on cell-of-origin (COO), including Germinal Center B-cell type, Activated B-cell type, and Unclassified type. COO assignment of DLBCL has important biological and prognostic significance, as well as emerging therapeutic implications. Herein, we describe the first clinical validation of a digital gene expression profiling assay (Lymph2Cx) to perform COO assignment in the routine work-up of DLBCL using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue sections and describe the results of 90 consecutive DLBCL cases analyzed prospectively by a College of American Pathologists/Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CAP/CLIA)-certified clinical molecular diagnostics laboratory.

Is Routine Pathologic Evaluation of Sebaceous Cysts Necessary?: A 15-Year Retrospective Review of a Single Institution.

A question arose in our practice of whether all cysts considered sebaceous should be sent for pathologic evaluation. To address this controversial topic, we performed a retrospective study of our single institution's histopathology database. A natural language search of the CoPath database across the institution was undertaken using the diagnosis of sebaceous cyst, epidermal cyst, epidermoid cyst, epithelial cyst, infundibular cyst, pilar cyst, trichilemmal cyst, and steatocystoma. A surgical pathologic review of all specimens with one of these preexcision diagnoses was included in the 15-year retrospective study of 1998 to 2013. All slides were confirmed to have undergone histopathologic review, and the preexcision diagnoses were compared with the postexcision diagnoses. Chart review was undertaken in instances of a diagnosis of malignancy. A total of 13,746 samples were identified. Forty-eight specimens had histopathologic diagnosis of malignancy, for an incidence of 0.3% and with the most common malignancy being squamous cell carcinoma. Chart review showed that for all cases, the surgeons reported uncertainty with regard to the diagnosis because of history or physical characteristics, or both. In addition, a comprehensive literature review showed results consistent with our data and illustrated 19 cases during the past 10 years in which most of the findings were squamous cell carcinoma. We propose the recommendation that routine pathologic evaluation of sebaceous cysts is necessary only when clinical suspicion exists.

Decreased faux addenda following standardisation of pathologist practice.

AIMS: We wanted to improve the quality of histopathology addenda and amendments by introducing standardised nomenclature and procedures. METHODS: We standardised amendment and addenda definitions, implemented a pathologist visual work tool, and evaluated and quantitated all amendments and addenda for 3 months prior to implementation and 17 months after. RESULTS: In the 3-month pre-intervention period, 32 of 979 addenda (3.3%) were misused and 18 of 98 amendments (18.4%) were incorrectly classified. In the 17-month post-intervention period, 57 of 5906 addenda (1.0%) were misused and 54 of 752 amendments (7.2%) were incorrectly classified. These differences were statistically significant (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of standardised nomenclature and a visual work tool significantly improved the quality of histopathology addenda and amendments.