The World Health Organization classification of pancreaticobiliary cytopathology stratifies risk of malignancy and outcome for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of the pancreas.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) has recently published a classification for reporting pancreaticobiliary cytopathology with differences compared to the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology (PSC) classification. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected from pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspirations from 2014 to 2017 at a pancreatic cancer center. Absolute risk of malignancy (AROM), relative risk (to benign), performance characteristics, and overall survival were calculated for the entire cohort with comparison of cysts and solid lesions. RESULTS: In total, 2562 cases were included: 16% cyst (n = 411) and 84% solid (n = 2151). The histologic confirmation rate was 43% (n = 1101) and the median follow-up (for benign) was 56 months. For WHO I-VII, overall AROM (%) was 23, 22, 62, 13, 65, 97, and 100; cyst AROM was 7, 0, 19, 13, 38, 78, and 100; and solid AROM was 50, 29, 70, 15, 100, 99, and 100. For PSC I-VI, overall AROM (%) was 23, 29, 64, 0 (IVa), 60 (IVb), 97, and 100; cyst AROM was 7, 0, 19, 0, 21, 78, and 100; and solid AROM was 50, 35, 73, 0, 92, 99, and 100. The difference in relative risk for a cyst (vs. solid) overall was 0.38 for WHO and 0.26 for PSC. WHO and PSC categories showed stratification for the probability of overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Cystic versus solid lesion type can dramatically affect AROM, particularly for nondiagnostic (I), benign (II), atypical (III), and WHO V categories. WHO IV conveys a similarly low AROM for cystic and solid types. Both classifications stratify the probability of overall survival, including the newly introduced categories WHO IV and WHO V.

Salivary gland fine-needle aspiration biopsy: quality assurance results from a tertiary cancer center.

INTRODUCTION: Fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) plays a critical role in the management of patients with salivary gland lesions. A specific diagnosis can be difficult due to the wide range of lesions with overlapping morphologic features, potentially leading to interpretation errors. We analyzed the cytologic-histologic discrepancies identified in the quality assurance program of a major cancer center in cases of salivary gland FNAB and performed a root cause analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Salivary gland FNAB specimens performed during a 12-year period at a major tertiary cancer center were reviewed. The inclusion criteria for this study included FNAB cases of salivary glands with subsequent histologic or flow cytometry follow up. The cytologic diagnoses for these cases were recategorized according to the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (MSRSGC) based on the original reports. The risk of neoplasm and malignancy based on the cases with subsequent resection or flow cytometry and the most common causes of discrepancy were analyzed. RESULTS: The risk of neoplasm ranged from 41% to 99% and the risk of malignancy ranged from 22% to 99% among the different MSRSGC categories. Lymphoid and myoepithelial rich lesions were the most common miscategorized lesions using the MSRSGC. Reactive changes due to inflammation were associated with overcalls. The most common malignancy in the atypical category was mucoepidermoid carcinomas. CONCLUSIONS: Myoepithelial and lymphoid rich lesions arising in the salivary gland are associated with a higher risk of misclassification. The use of category IVB in the MSRSGC is appropriate for lesions with abundant myoepithelial cells. Reactive atypia seen in sialadenitis was the most common feature associated with overcall.