Navigating Practice Issues Related to the Unsatisfactory Cervicovaginal Papanicolaou Test: Survey Results of Laboratories Participating in the 2020 College of American Pathologists PAP Education Program.

CONTEXT.­: Unsatisfactory Papanicolaou (Pap) tests pose a unique set of challenges to the laboratory with regard to their processing, review, reporting, and performance of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. There are no standardized guidelines for the review process and handling of unsatisfactory Pap tests. OBJECTIVE.­: To assess the current practice patterns regarding various aspects of the unsatisfactory Pap test, from processing to reporting, across laboratories worldwide. DESIGN.­: A supplemental questionnaire was mailed to laboratories participating in the 2020 College of American Pathologists (CAP) Gynecologic Cytopathology (PAP Education) Program, requesting data regarding the unsatisfactory Pap test. RESULTS.­: Of 1520 participating laboratories, 619 (40.7%) responded, and the responses of 577 laboratories were included for further analysis. Only 64.6% (373 of 577) laboratories used the unsatisfactory Pap test criteria as specified by the 2014 Bethesda System. About three-quarters of the respondents (433 of 576; 75.2%) routinely rescreened unsatisfactory Pap tests. Routine repreparation of such Pap tests was performed by 54.9% (316 of 576) of laboratories, and 52.0% (293 of 563) used glacial acetic acid for repreparing excessively bloody specimens. HPV test results were reported for unsatisfactory Pap tests, always or sometimes, by 62.4% (353 of 566) of respondents. CONCLUSIONS.­: This CAP survey reveals important information regarding the practice patterns pertaining to several aspects of the unsatisfactory Pap test. It also provides valuable insight into the quality assurance measures that can be implemented for such tests. Future studies can further aid in the standardization of all components of the handling of unsatisfactory Pap tests for overall quality improvement.

SPOT/Dx Pilot Reanalysis and College of American Pathologists Proficiency Testing for KRAS and NRAS Demonstrate Excellent Laboratory Performance.

CONTEXT.­: The Sustainable Predictive Oncology Therapeutics and Diagnostics quality assurance pilot study (SPOT/Dx pilot) on molecular oncology next-generation sequencing (NGS) reportedly demonstrated performance limitations of NGS laboratory-developed tests, including discrepancies with a US Food and Drug Administration-approved companion diagnostic. The SPOT/Dx pilot methods differ from those used in proficiency testing (PT) programs. OBJECTIVE.­: To reanalyze SPOT/Dx pilot data using PT program methods and compare to PT program data.Also see p. 136. DESIGN.­: The College of American Pathologists (CAP) Molecular Oncology Committee reanalyzed SPOT/Dx pilot data applying PT program methods, adjusting for confounding conditions, and compared them to CAP NGS PT program performance (2019-2022). RESULTS.­: Overall detection rates of KRAS and NRAS single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) and multinucleotide variants (MNVs) by SPOT/Dx pilot laboratories were 96.8% (716 of 740) and 81.1% (129 of 159), respectively. In CAP PT programs, the overall detection rates for the same SNVs and MNVs were 97.2% (2671 of 2748) and 91.8% (1853 of 2019), respectively. In 2022, the overall detection rate for 5 KRAS and NRAS MNVs in CAP PT programs was 97.3% (1161 of 1193). CONCLUSIONS.­: CAP PT program data demonstrate that laboratories consistently have high detection rates for KRAS and NRAS variants. The SPOT/Dx pilot has multiple design and analytic differences with established PT programs. Reanalyzed pilot data that adjust for confounding conditions demonstrate that laboratories proficiently detect SNVs and less successfully detect rare to never-observed MNVs. The SPOT/Dx pilot results are not generalizable to all molecular oncology testing and should not be used to market products or change policy affecting all molecular oncology testing.

Recommendations for Performance Evaluation of Machine Learning in Pathology: A Concept Paper From the College of American Pathologists.

CONTEXT.­: Machine learning applications in the pathology clinical domain are emerging rapidly. As decision support systems continue to mature, laboratories will increasingly need guidance to evaluate their performance in clinical practice. Currently there are no formal guidelines to assist pathology laboratories in verification and/or validation of such systems. These recommendations are being proposed for the evaluation of machine learning systems in the clinical practice of pathology. OBJECTIVE.­: To propose recommendations for performance evaluation of in vitro diagnostic tests on patient samples that incorporate machine learning as part of the preanalytical, analytical, or postanalytical phases of the laboratory workflow. Topics described include considerations for machine learning model evaluation including risk assessment, predeployment requirements, data sourcing and curation, verification and validation, change control management, human-computer interaction, practitioner training, and competency evaluation. DATA SOURCES.­: An expert panel performed a review of the literature, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidance, and laboratory and government regulatory frameworks. CONCLUSIONS.­: Review of the literature and existing documents enabled the development of proposed recommendations. This white paper pertains to performance evaluation of machine learning systems intended to be implemented for clinical patient testing. Further studies with real-world clinical data are encouraged to support these proposed recommendations. Performance evaluation of machine learning models is critical to verification and/or validation of in vitro diagnostic tests using machine learning intended for clinical practice.

Cytologic-Histologic Correlation Practices for Nongynecologic Cytology Specimens: A Survey by the College of American Pathologists Cytopathology Committee.

CONTEXT.­: Cytologic-histologic correlation (CHC) is a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-mandated requirement for gynecologic cytology, but no similar requirement exists for nongynecologic cytology. This study presents the findings from a College of American Pathologists' survey of nongynecologic cytology practice patterns. OBJECTIVE.­: To survey the current CHC practices for nongynecologic cytology. DESIGN.­: Data were analyzed from a survey developed by the committee and distributed to participants in the Nongynecologic Cytopathology Education Program mailing. RESULTS.­: Adoption of CHC for nongynecologic cytology cases is worldwide, with 88.5% of institutions performing CHC on these specimens, a substantial increase from previous years. Performance of CHC varied by institution type, with clinic or regional/local independent laboratories and national/corporate laboratories performing CHC significantly less frequently than hospitals, university hospitals/academic medical centers, and Veterans Administration/Department of Defense hospital institutions. Most CHC was performed concurrently in real time, when the corresponding surgical specimen was reviewed. Selection for real-time concurrent CHC was by the interpreting pathologist, the pathologist diagnosing the surgical biopsy sample or cytopathology case, or both. Sampling was by far the most common reason for discordance. A 2-step difference was the most frequent threshold for discordance between cytology and surgical specimens, but this criterion varied among institutions, with no majority definition. The positive predictive value of a positive cytology finding was calculated rarely in North American institutions but was calculated more frequently in international institutions. CONCLUSIONS.­: CHC practices for nongynecologic cytopathology mirror those found for CHC of gynecologic cytopathology.

Implementation, Evolution, and Laboratory Performance of Methods-Based Proficiency Testing for Next-Generation Sequencing Detection of Germline Sequence Variants.

CONTEXT.­: Next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based assays are used for diagnosis of diverse inherited disorders. Limited data are available pertaining to interlaboratory analytical performance of these assays. OBJECTIVE.­: To report on the College of American Pathologists (CAP) NGS Germline Program, which is methods based, and explore the evolution in laboratory testing practices. DESIGN.­: Results from the NGS Germline Program from 2016-2020 were analyzed for interlaboratory analytical performance. Self-reported laboratory testing practices were also evaluated. RESULTS.­: From 2016-2020, a total of 297 laboratories participated in at least 1 program mailing. Of the 289 laboratories that provided information on tests offered, 138 (47.8%) offered only panel testing throughout their enrollment, while 35 (12.1%) offered panels and exome testing, 30 (10.4%) offered only exomes, 9 (3.1%) offered only genomes, and 15 (5.2%) offered panels, exomes, and genomes. The remainder (62 laboratories, 21.4%) changed their test offerings during the 2016-2020 timeframe. Considering each genomic position/interval, the median detection percentage at variant positions across the 2016-2020 mailings ranged from 94.3% to 100%, while at reference positions (no variant detected), the median correct response percentage was 100% across all mailings. When considering performance of individual laboratories, 89.5% (136 of 152) to 98.0% (149 of 152) of laboratories successfully met the detection threshold (≥90% of the variants present), while 94.6% (87 of 92) to 100% (163 of 163) of laboratories met the 95% specificity threshold across mailings. CONCLUSIONS.­: Since the inception of this program, laboratories have consistently performed well. The median sensitivity and specificity of detection of sequence variants included in this program (eg, single nucleotide variants, insertions, and deletions) were 100.0%.

Pancreaticobiliary Cytology Practice in 2021: Results of a College of American Pathologists Survey.

CONTEXT.­: The College of American Pathologists (CAP) surveys provide national benchmarks of pathology practice. OBJECTIVE.­: To investigate pancreaticobiliary cytology practice in domestic and international laboratories in 2021. DESIGN.­: We analyzed data from the CAP Pancreaticobiliary Cytology Practice Supplemental Questionnaire that was distributed to laboratories participating in the 2021 CAP Nongynecologic Cytopathology Education Program. RESULTS.­: Ninety-three percent (567 of 612) of respondent laboratories routinely evaluated pancreaticobiliary cytology specimens. Biliary brushing (85%) was the most common pancreaticobiliary cytology specimen evaluated, followed by pancreatic fine-needle aspiration (79%). The most used sampling methods reported by 235 laboratories were 22-gauge needle for fine-needle aspiration (62%) and SharkCore needle for fine-needle biopsy (27%). Cell block was the most used slide preparation method (76%), followed by liquid-based cytology (59%) for pancreatic cystic lesions. Up to 95% (303 of 320) of laboratories performed rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) on pancreatic solid lesions, while 56% (180 of 320) performed ROSE for cystic lesions. Thirty-six percent (193 of 530) of laboratories used the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology System for Reporting Pancreaticobiliary Cytology in 2021. Among all institution types, significant differences in specimen volume, specimen type, ROSE practice, and case sign-out were identified. Additionally, significant differences in specimen type, slide preparation, and ROSE practice were found. CONCLUSIONS.­: This is the first survey from the CAP to investigate pancreaticobiliary cytology practice. The findings reveal significant differences among institution types and between domestic and international laboratories. These data provide a baseline for future studies in a variety of practice settings.

RNA Sequencing for Solid Tumor Fusion Gene Detection: Proficiency Testing Practice and Performance Comparison.

CONTEXT.­: Next-generation sequencing-based approaches using RNA have increasingly been used by clinical laboratories for the detection of fusion genes, intragenic rearrangements, and exon-skipping events. Correspondingly, the College of American Pathologists (CAP) has advanced RNA sequencing proficiency testing (PT) to ensure optimal performance of these assays. OBJECTIVE.­: To report on laboratory performance and practices of RNA sequencing for the detection of fusion genes, intragenic rearrangements, and exon-skipping events using CAP PT data from 8 mailings (2018-A through 2021-B). DESIGN.­: CAP PT RNA sequencing program results from 153 laboratories across 24 proficiency test specimens, interrogating 22 distinct engineered fusion transcripts, were analyzed for correct identification of the fusion event, associated performance variables, and laboratory practices. RESULTS.­: Overall, the 4-year program detection rate (sensitivity) was 95.5% (1486 of 1556 results). False-negative rates were 3.6% (53 of 1463) and 18.3% (17 of 93) for fusion gene and intragenic rearrangement/exon-skipping events, respectively. Only 19 false-positive results were reported among the 8 PT mailings, and most were likely the result of preanalytical or postanalytical errors. There were no practice characteristics (eg, instrumentation, sequencing method) significantly associated with the fusion detection results. CONCLUSIONS.­: These data reveal a high overall sensitivity and specificity for fusion gene detection by participating laboratories using clinical RNA sequencing. Performance was comparable across all laboratories, regardless of methodology. The fraction of false-negative results for intragenic rearrangement/exon-skipping events was greater than that for the chimeric fusion genes. False-negative results could not be attributed to any specific practice characteristics.

Antibody Titers in Transfusion Medicine: A Critical Reevaluation of Testing Accuracy, Reliability, and Clinical Use.

CONTEXT.­: Substantial variability between different antibody titration methods has been identified since the development and introduction of the uniform procedure in 2008. OBJECTIVE.­: To determine whether more recent methods or techniques decrease interlaboratory and intralaboratory variation measured using proficiency testing. DESIGN.­: Proficiency test data for antibody titration between 2014 and 2018 were obtained from the College of American Pathologists. Interlaboratory and intralaboratory variations were compared by analyzing the distribution of titer results by method and phase, comparing the results against the supplier's quality control titer, and by evaluating the distribution of paired titer results when each laboratory received a sample with the same titer twice. RESULTS.­: A total of 1337 laboratories participated in the antibody titer proficiency test during the study period. Only 54.1% (5874 of 10 852) of anti-D and 63.4% (3603 of 5680) of anti-A reported responses were within 1 titer of the supplier's intended result. Review of the agreement between laboratories of the same methodology found that 78.4% (3139 of 4004) for anti-A and 89.0% (9655 of 10 852) of laboratory responses for anti-D fell within 1 titer of the mode response. When provided with 2 consecutive samples of the same titer (anti-D titer: 16), 85% (367 of 434) of laboratories using the uniform procedure and 80% (458 of 576) using the other method reported a titer difference of 1 or less. CONCLUSIONS.­: Despite advances, interlaboratory and intralaboratory variance for this assay remains high in comparison with the strong reliance on titer results in clinical practice. There needs to be a reevaluation of the role of this test in clinical decision-making.

Obstetric and Newborn Weak D-Phenotype RBC Testing and Rh Immune Globulin Management Recommendations: Lessons From a Blinded Specimen-Testing Survey of 81 Transfusion Services.

CONTEXT.­: Modern RHD genotyping can be used to determine when patients with serologic weak D phenotypes have RHD gene variants at risk for anti-D alloimmunization. However, serologic testing, RhD interpretations, and laboratory management of these patients are quite variable. OBJECTIVE.­: To obtain interlaboratory comparisons of serologic testing, RhD interpretations, Rh immune globulin (RhIG) management, fetomaternal hemorrhage testing, and RHD genotyping for weak D-reactive specimens. DESIGN.­: We devised an educational exercise in which 81 transfusion services supporting obstetrics performed tube-method RhD typing on 2 unknown red blood cell challenge specimens identified as (1) maternal and (2) newborn. Both specimens were from the same weak D-reactive donor. The exercise revealed how participants responded to these different clinical situations. RESULTS.­: Of reporting laboratories, 14% (11 of 80) obtained discrepant immediate-spin reactions on the 2 specimens. Nine different reporting terms were used to interpret weak D-reactive maternal RhD types to obstetricians. In laboratories obtaining negative maternal immediate-spin reactions, 28% (16 of 57) performed unwarranted antiglobulin testing, sometimes leading to recommendations against giving RhIG. To screen for excess fetomaternal hemorrhage after a weak D-reactive newborn, 47% (34 of 73) of reporting laboratories would have employed a contraindicated fetal rosette test, risking false-negative results and inadequate RhIG coverage. Sixty percent (44 of 73) of laboratories would obtain RHD genotyping in some or all cases. CONCLUSIONS.­: For obstetric and neonatal patients with serologic weak D phenotypes, we found several critical problems in transfusion service laboratory practices. We provide recommendations for appropriate testing, consistent immunohematologic terminology, and RHD genotype-guided management of Rh immune globulin therapy and RBC transfusions.

Current State of Cytologic-Histologic Correlation Implementation for North American and International Laboratories: Results of the College of American Pathologists Cytopathology Committee Laboratory Practices in Gynecologic Cytology Survey.

CONTEXT.­: The College of American Pathologists (CAP) updated the Laboratory Accreditation Program Cytopathology Checklist to assist laboratories in meeting and exceeding the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments standards for gynecologic cytologic-histologic correlation (CHC). OBJECTIVE.­: To survey the current CHC practices. DESIGN.­: Data were analyzed from a survey developed by the committee and distributed to participants in the CAP Gynecologic Cytopathology PAP Education Program mailing. RESULTS.­: Worldwide, CHC practice is nearly universally adopted, with an overall rate of 87.0% (568 of 653). CHC material was highly accessible. CHC was commonly performed real time/concurrently at the time the corresponding surgical pathology was reviewed. Investigation of CHC discordances varied with North American laboratories usually having a single pathologist review all discrepant histology and cytology slides to determine the reason for discordance, while international laboratories have a second pathologist review histology slides to determine the reason for discordance. The cause of CHC discordance was primarily sampling issues. The more common statistical metrics for CHC monitoring were the total percentage of cases that correlated with subsequent biopsies, screening error rate by cytotechnologist, and interpretative error rate by cytotechnologist. CONCLUSIONS.­: Many laboratories have adopted and implemented the CHC guidelines with identifiable differences in practices between North American and international laboratories. We identify the commonalities and differences between North American and international institutional practices including where CHC is performed, how CHC cases are identified and their accessibility, when CHC is performed, who investigates discordances, what discordances are identified, and how the findings affect quality improvement.

Using American Type Culture Collection Cell Lines to Evaluate Interlaboratory Variables for Estrogen Receptor and Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Immunostaining.

CONTEXT.­: Most laboratories currently use patient tissues for validating immunohistochemical stains. OBJECTIVE.­: To explore advantages of using cell lines with known antigenicity as a validation method. DESIGN.­: Five American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) cell lines with known negative, low positive, and moderate to strong estrogen receptor (ER) expression as well as negative, equivocal, and positive human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression were cultured and made into cell blocks. One block from each cell line was fixed in formalin and another in ethanol before cell block preparation. Two sets of paired unstained slides from each block were sent to 10 different laboratories for HER2 and ER staining to be stained on runs from different days according to each laboratory's defined protocol. RESULTS.­: The 10 study participants evaluated 40 slides in a blinded fashion. For ER expression, all 80 interpretations for the ER strong and moderate positive cell lines had the target ER-positive result, and 74 of 80 ER-negative cell lines (92.5%) had agreement with the intended negative result. The ER low positive cell line showed varied but positive expression among all observers. The HER2 (3+)-positive cell lines yielded a target interpretation of 3+ in 65 of 80 interpretations (81.2%). For the HER2-negative cell line 69 of 78 interpretations (88.5%) were consistent with the target response (0 or 1+). No significant variation was observed between the ethanol- and non-ethanol-exposed cell lines, or between runs by the same laboratory. Variation from target results clustered within laboratories. CONCLUSIONS.­: This study indicates that variability between laboratories can be identified by using cell lines for quantitative or semiquantitative immunohistochemistry when using cultured cell lines of known antigenicity. These cell lines could potentially play a role in aiding anatomic pathology laboratories in validating immunohistochemistry tests for formalin- and ethanol-fixed tissues.

Four-Year Laboratory Performance of the First College of American Pathologists In Silico Next-Generation Sequencing Bioinformatics Proficiency Testing Surveys.

CONTEXT.­: In 2016, the College of American Pathologists (CAP) launched the first next-generation sequencing (NGS) in silico bioinformatics proficiency testing survey to evaluate the performance of clinical laboratory bioinformatics pipelines for the detection of oncology-associated variants at varying allele fractions. This survey focused on 2 commonly used oncology panels, the Illumina TruSeq Amplicon Cancer Panel and the Thermo Fisher Ion AmpliSeq Cancer Hotspot v2 Panel. OBJECTIVE.­: To review the analytical performance of laboratories participating in the CAP NGS bioinformatics (NGSB) surveys, comprising NGSB1 for Illumina users and NGSB2 for Thermo Fisher Ion Torrent users, between 2016 and 2019. DESIGN.­: Responses from 78 laboratories were analyzed for accuracy and associated performance characteristics. RESULTS.­: The analytical sensitivity was 90.0% (1901 of 2112) for laboratories using the Illumina platform and 94.8% (2153 of 2272) for Thermo Fisher Ion Torrent users. Variant type and variant allele fraction were significantly associated with performance. False-negative results were seen mostly for multi-nucleotide variants and variants engineered at variant allele fractions of less than 25%. Analytical specificity for all participating laboratories was 99.8% (9303 of 9320). There was no statistically significant association between deletion-insertion length and detection rate. CONCLUSIONS.­: These results demonstrated high analytical sensitivity and specificity, supporting the feasibility and utility of using in silico mutagenized NGS data sets as a supplemental challenge to CAP surveys for oncology-associated variants based on physical samples. This program demonstrates the opportunity and challenges that can guide future surveys inclusive of customized in silico programs.

Clinical Testing for Tumor Cell-Free DNA: College of American Pathologists Proficiency Programs Reveal Practice Trends.

CONTEXT.­: Clinical testing for tumor cell-free DNA (cfDNA) has evolved rapidly, but no practice guidelines exist. OBJECTIVE.­: To summarize cfDNA laboratory practices based on self-reporting and assess preanalytical, analytical, and postanalytical trends that may influence the quality, accuracy, and consistency of cfDNA testing. DESIGN.­: Data were derived from the College of American Pathologists cfDNA proficiency testing program submitted by 101 participating laboratories from 2018 to 2019. RESULTS.­: Most laboratories performing clinical circulating tumor DNA testing are commercial/nonhospital (71.2%; 72 of 101) and international (77.2%; 78 of 101) laboratories. Commercial laboratories had higher monthly test volumes than hospital-based laboratories (median, 36 versus 7-8) and tended to have larger gene panels (median, 50 versus 11 genes) when panel-based testing was offered. The main clinical indications include therapy selection and treatment/disease monitoring. Plasma is the most commonly accepted specimen, which is predominantly collected in cell-stabilizing tubes. Equal proportions of laboratories use next-generation sequencing (NGS) and non-NGS methods to assess key genes, including EGFR, BRAF, KRAS, NRAS, and IDH1. Most laboratories reported a lower limit of detection (LLOD) of 0.5%, variant allele frequency or less, which did not differ by method, NGS or non-NGS, except for EGFR. Sixty-five percent (17 of 26) of laboratories using the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved non-NGS EGFR assay report analytical sensitivities higher than 0.5%, as compared to 15% (16 of 104) of laboratories using an alternative NGS or non-NGS method. There is also a wider range in LLODs obtained for the FDA-approved EGFR assay than nonapproved assays. CONCLUSIONS.­: These results highlight emerging practice trends and serve as a foundation to initiate future practice recommendations.

Current Laboratory Testing Practices for Assessment of ERBB2/HER2 in Endometrial Serous Carcinoma and Colorectal Carcinoma.

CONTEXT.­: Therapy targeted at human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2; also known as ERBB2) was used initially for breast and gastroesophageal carcinoma and has more recently been adopted for endometrial serous carcinoma (ESC) and colorectal carcinoma (CRC). There is evidence that predictive biomarker testing algorithms for HER2 must be tumor type specific and that an algorithm validated for one tumor type cannot be applied to another. OBJECTIVE.­: To describe current laboratory practices for HER2 assessment in ESC and CRC. DESIGN.­: We surveyed laboratories participating in the 2021 College of American Pathologists (CAP) HER2 immunohistochemistry proficiency testing program. RESULTS.­: The survey was distributed to 1548 laboratories and returned by 1195, of which 83.5% (998) were in the United States. For ESC, 24.0% (287) of laboratories reported performing in-house testing for HER2 by immunohistochemical staining and/or in situ hybridization; of these, 44.3% (127) performed it reflexively on all cases of ESC. The most common criterion for evaluating HER2 was the American Society of Clinical Oncology/CAP 2018 guideline for breast carcinoma (69.0%; 194 of 281), whereas only 16.0% (45) of laboratories used guidelines specific to ESC. For CRC, 20.2% (239 of 1185) of laboratories performed in-house HER2 testing, and 82.0% of these (196) did the test only at the clinician's request. A plurality (49.4%; 115 of 233) used gastroesophageal cancer guidelines when scoring CRC, 30.0% (70) used the CRC scoring system from the HERACLES trial, and 16.3% (38) used the American Society of Clinical Oncology/CAP 2018 guideline for breast carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS.­: Laboratories vary in their approach to HER2 testing in ESC and CRC. Most laboratories did not report using tumor type-specific recommendations for HER2 interpretation. The lack of standardization could present a challenge to evidence-based practice when considering targeted therapy for these diseases.

Reported Awareness and Adoption of 2021 Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate Equations Among US Clinical Laboratories, March 2022.

This study includes clinical laboratories that participated in the first general chemistry proficiency testing survey in 2022 to assess awareness and adoption of new equations from the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) that eliminated race-adjustment factors, including one based on creatinine and one based on creatinine and cystatin C.

Clinical Laboratory Testing Practices in Diffuse Gliomas Prior to Publication of 2021 World Health Organization Classification of Central Nervous System Tumors.

CONTEXT.­: Integration of molecular data into glioma classification supports diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic decision-making; however, testing practices for these informative biomarkers in clinical laboratories remain unclear. OBJECTIVE.­: To examine the prevalence of molecular testing for clinically relevant biomarkers in adult and pediatric gliomas through review of a College of American Pathologists proficiency testing survey prior to the release of the 2021 World Health Organization Classification of Central Nervous System Tumors. DESIGN.­: College of American Pathologists proficiency testing 2020 survey results from 96 laboratories performing molecular testing for diffuse gliomas were used to determine the use of testing for molecular biomarkers in gliomas. RESULTS.­: The data provide perspective into the testing practices for diffuse gliomas from a broad group of clinical laboratories in 2020. More than 98% of participating laboratories perform testing for glioma biomarkers recognized as diagnostic for specific subtypes, including IDH. More than 60% of laboratories also use molecular markers to differentiate between astrocytic and oligodendroglial lineage tumors, with some laboratories providing more comprehensive analyses, including prognostic biomarkers, such as CDKN2A/B homozygous deletions. Almost all laboratories test for MGMT promoter methylation to identify patients with an increased likelihood of responding to temozolomide. CONCLUSIONS.­: These findings highlight the state of molecular testing in 2020 for the diagnosis and classification of diffuse gliomas at large academic medical centers. The findings show that comprehensive molecular testing is not universal across clinical laboratories and highlight the gaps between laboratory practices in 2020 and the recommendations in the 2021 World Health Organization Classification of Central Nervous System Tumors.

Raising the Bar: Improving Antimicrobial Resistance Detection by Clinical Laboratories by Ensuring Use of Current Breakpoints.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a pressing global challenge detected by antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) performed by clinical laboratories. AST results are interpreted using clinical breakpoints, which are updated to enable accurate detection of new and emerging AMR. Laboratories that do not apply up-to-date breakpoints impede global efforts to address the AMR crisis, but the extent of this practice is poorly understood. METHODS: A total of 1490 clinical laboratories participating in a College of American Pathologists proficiency testing survey for bacterial cultures were queried to determine use of obsolete breakpoints. RESULTS: Between 37.9% and 70.5% of US laboratories reported using obsolete breakpoints for the antimicrobials that were queried. In contrast, only 17.7%-43.7% of international laboratories reported using obsolete breakpoints (P < .001 for all comparisons). Use of current breakpoints varied by AST system, with more laboratories reporting use of current breakpoints in the US if the system had achieved US Food and Drug Administration clearance with current breakpoints. Among laboratories that indicated use of obsolete breakpoints, 55.9% had no plans to update to current standards. The most common reason cited was manufacturer-related issues (51.3%) and lack of internal resources to perform analytical validation studies to make the update (23.4%). Thirteen percent of laboratories indicated they were unaware of breakpoint changes or the need to update breakpoints. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate a significant gap in the ability to detect AMR in the US, and to a lesser extent internationally. Improved application of current breakpoints by clinical laboratories will require combined action from regulatory agencies, laboratory accreditation groups, and device manufacturers.

Tiered Somatic Variant Classification Adoption Has Increased Worldwide With Some Practice Differences Based on Location and Institutional Setting.

CONTEXT.­: The 2017 Association for Molecular Pathology/American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists (CAP) tier classification guideline provides a framework to standardize interpretation and reporting of somatic variants. OBJECTIVE.­: To evaluate the adoption and performance of the 2017 guideline among laboratories performing somatic next-generation sequencing (NGS). DESIGN.­: A survey was distributed to laboratories participating in NGS CAP proficiency testing for solid tumors (NGSST) and hematologic malignancies (NGSHM). RESULTS.­: Worldwide, 64.4% (152 of 236) of NGSST and 66.4% (87 of 131) of NGSHM participants used tier classification systems, of which the 2017 guideline was used by 84.9% (129 of 152) of NGSST and 73.6% (64 of 87) of NGSHM participants. The 2017 guideline was modified by 24.4% (30 of 123) of NGSST and 21.7% (13 of 60) of NGSHM laboratories. Laboratories implementing the 2017 guideline were satisfied or very satisfied (74.2% [89 of 120] NGSST and 69.5% [41 of 59] NGSHM), and the impression of tier classification reproducibility was high (mean of 3.9 [NGSST] and 3.6 [NGSHM] on a 5-point scale). Of nonusers, 35.2% (38 of 108) of NGSST and 39.4% (26 of 66) of NGSHM laboratories were planning implementation. For future guideline revisions, respondents favored including variants to monitor disease (63.9% [78 of 122] NGSST, 80.0% [48 of 60] NGSHM) and germline variants (55.3% [63 of 114] NGSST, 75.0% [45 of 60] NGSHM). Additional subtiers were not favored by academic laboratories compared to nonacademic laboratories (P < .001 NGSST and P = .02 NGSHM). CONCLUSIONS.­: The 2017 guideline has been implemented by more than 50.0% of CAP laboratories. While most laboratories using the 2017 guideline report satisfaction, thoughtful guideline modifications may further enhance the quality, reproducibility, and clinical utility of the 2017 guideline for tiered somatic variant classification.

Neoplastic Cellularity Assessment in Molecular Testing.

CONTEXT.­: Neoplastic cellularity assessment has become an essential component of molecular oncology testing; however, there are currently no best practice recommendations or guidelines for this potentially variable step in the testing process. OBJECTIVE.­: To describe the domestic and international practices of neoplastic cellularity assessment and to determine how variations in laboratory practices affect neoplastic cellularity assessment accuracy. DESIGN.­: Data were derived from 57 US and international laboratories that participated in the 2019 College of American Pathologists Neoplastic Cellularity Proficiency Testing Survey (NEO-B 2019). NEO-B 2019 included 29 laboratory practice questions and 5 images exhibiting challenging histologic features. Participants assessed the neoplastic cellularity of hematoxylin-eosin-stained digital images, and results were compared to a criterion standard derived from a manual cell count. RESULTS.­: The survey responses showed variations in the laboratory practices for the assessment of neoplastic cellularity, including the definition of neoplastic cellularity, assessment methodology, counting practices, and quality assurance practices. In some instances, variation in laboratory practice affected neoplastic cellularity assessment performance. CONCLUSIONS.­: The results highlight the need for a consensus definition and improved standardization of the assessment of neoplastic cellularity. We put forth an initial set of best practice recommendations to begin the process of standardizing neoplastic cellularity assessment.