RESUMO
Surgical resection with free surgical margins is the cornerstone of successful primary treatment of vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC). In general reexcision is recommended when the minimum peripheral surgical margin (MPSM) is <8 mm microscopically. Pathologists are, therefore, required to report the minimum distance from the tumor to the surgical margin. Currently, there are no guidelines on how to make this measurement, as this is often considered straightforward. However, during the 2018 Annual Meeting of the British Association of Gynaecological Pathologists (BAGP), a discussion on this topic revealed a variety of opinions with regard to reporting and method of measuring margin clearance in VSCC specimens. Given the need for uniformity and the lack of guidance in the literature, we initiated an online survey in order to deliver a consensus-based definition of peripheral surgical margins in VSCC resections. The survey included questions and representative diagrams of peripheral margin measurements. In total, 57 pathologists participated in this survey. On the basis of consensus results, we propose to define MPSM in VSCC as the minimum distance from the peripheral edge of the invasive tumor nests toward the inked peripheral surgical margin reported in millimeters. This MPSM measurement should run through tissue and preferably be measured in a straight line. Along with MPSM, other relevant measurements such as depth of invasion or tumor thickness and distance to deep margins should be reported. This manuscript provides guidance to the practicing pathologist in measuring MPSM in VSCC resection specimens, in order to promote uniformity in measuring and reporting.
Assuntos
Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/patologia , Neoplasias Vulvares/patologia , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/cirurgia , Feminino , Ginecologia , Humanos , Margens de Excisão , Patologistas , Inquéritos e Questionários , Neoplasias Vulvares/cirurgiaRESUMO
A 3-tier histopathologic scoring system, the chemotherapy response score (CRS), was previously devised for reporting the histologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in interval debulking surgery specimens of stage IIIc/IV tuboovarian high-grade serous carcinoma. This has been shown to predict the outcome and offer additional information to other methods of assessing the treatment response. In the present study, the reproducibility of this scoring system was assessed by determining the interobserver agreement among reporting pathologists. A total of 5 groups each comprising 3 pathologists with different levels of expertise were selected. The participants underwent an online tutorial on how to apply the CRS system. 40 cases (38 cases in 2 appraiser groups) were scored individually by each of the 15 pathologists. The interobserver reproducibility was calculated using Fleiss' κ, Kendall's coefficient of concordance, and the absolute agreement between (a) individual pathologists within 1 group, (b) with the majority score agreement between all groups, and (c) with all individual scores. The CRS system was found to be highly reproducible among all the pathologists' groups (κ=0.761). The agreement in identifying the group of patients with the best response to chemotherapy was exceptionally high (κ=0.926). We conclude that CRS has a high interobserver reproducibility, especially in identifying the subgroup of patients with the best chemotherapy response, justifying its inclusion in clinical trials and reporting practice.