Henry, Michael

Transthoracic fine needle aspiration (TFNA)/core needle biopsy (CNB) under computed tomography (CT) guidance has proved useful in the assessment of pulmonary nodules. We sought to determine the TFNA false‐negative (FN) rate at our institution and identify potential causes of FN diagnoses. Medical records were reviewed from 1,043 consecutive patients who underwent CT‐guided TFNA with or without CNB of lung nodules over a 5‐year time period (2003–2007). Thirty‐seven FN cases of “negative” TFNA/CNB with malignant outcome were identified with 36 cases available for review, of which 35 had a corresponding CNB. Cases were reviewed independently (blinded to original diagnosis) by three pathologists with 15 age‐ and sex‐matched positive and negative controls. Diagnosis (i.e., nondiagnostic, negative or positive for malignancy, atypical or suspicious) and qualitative assessments were recorded. Consensus diagnosis was suspicious or positive in 10 (28%) of 36 TFNA cases and suspicious in 1 (3%) of 35 CNB cases, indicating potential interpretive errors. Of the 11 interpretive errors (including both suspicious and positive cases), 8 were adenocarcinomas, 1 squamous cell carcinoma, 1 metastatic renal cell carcinoma, and 1 lymphoma. The remaining 25 FN cases (69.4%) were considered sampling errors and consisted of 7 adenocarcinomas, 3 nonsmall cell carcinomas, 3 lymphomas, 2 squamous cell carcinomas, and 2 renal cell carcinomas. Interpretive and sampling error cases were more likely to abut the pleura, while histopathologically, they tended to be necrotic and air‐dried. The overall FN rate in this patient cohort is 3.5% (1.1% interpretive and 2.4% sampling errors). Diagn. Cytopathol. 2014;42:1063–1068;. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Context: Molecular markers hold the promise of improved diagnostic yield in thyroid fine-needle biopsy. The Afirma gene expression classifier (GEC), available commercially, reports a negative predictive value of 94% in the diagnosis of benign nodules after indeterminate cytology. However, there are currently no independent studies of the performance of this assay. Objective: The aim was to assess the performance of the Afirma GEC in an academic medical center. Design: Samples for the GEC were collected according to the manufacturer's recommended protocol from patients undergoing thyroid fine-needle aspiration. We requested GEC analysis on nodules reported cytologically as follicular neoplasm or atypia or follicular lesion of undetermined significance from patients willing to defer surgery. Patients: All patients undergoing thyroid fine-needle aspiration during the study period, whose cytology was reported as follicular neoplasm or atypia of undetermined significance/follicular lesion of undetermined significance, were offered access to the test and recruited to this study. Intervention: Patients whose GEC was “benign” were offered ultrasound follow-up in lieu of surgery. Those with a “suspicious” GEC were advised to undergo diagnostic lobectomy. Setting: The study was conducted at a large academic medical center. Main Outcome Measure: We measured the rate of benign and suspicious calls from the Afirma GEC and histological diagnosis after surgery. Results: A total of 72 nucleic acid samples were sent for GEC analysis. In 12 (17%) of these samples, there was insufficient mRNA, leaving 60 Afirma results for analysis. Of these, 16 (27%) were benign, whereas 44 (73%) were suspicious. The rate of confirmed malignancy in GEC-suspicious nodules was only 17%. Conclusion: The Afirma GEC demonstrates a lower than expected rate of benign reports in follicular or Hürthle cell neoplasm and a lower than anticipated malignancy rate within GEC-suspicious nodules. These data suggest that the positive predictive value of the GEC is lower than previously reported and call into question the performance of the test when applied in the context of specialized academic cytopathology.

BACKGROUNDThe cytologic diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma (UC) of the upper urothelial tract (UT) is challenging. Using the UroVysion probe set adds diagnostic value for the detection of bladder cancer in voided urine. In instrumented UT specimens, the authors encountered positive UT cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) cases that did not demonstrate subsequent UT carcinoma.METHODSThe performance of cytology and FISH in the presence or absence of concomitant bladder cancer within 2 years was compared in 61 patients (112 samples) from 2003 through 2009. The mean follow‐up was 3.2 years. The authors also compared the performance of near‐tetrasomy versus hypertetrasomy. Biopsy confirmation of UTUC in 21 patients was considered the gold standard.RESULTSCytology alone was found to be poorly sensitive (38%) but highly specific (89%) for the detection of UTUC. FISH was found to increase the sensitivity of cytology and decrease specificity. Tetrasomy FISH resulted in many false‐positive cases. Other false‐positive FISH results were likely due to the presence of bladder cancer cells contaminating the UT specimen.CONCLUSIONSCaution should be used when evaluating instrumented urine specimens of the UT from patients with a previous history of bladder carcinoma, and tetrasomy FISH results should not be interpreted as abnormal because it significantly lowers the specificity of the test. The combination of cytology and FISH appears to have good specificity while maintaining good sensitivity in evaluating UTUC when using modified scoring criteria for the appropriate patient population. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2014;122:459–467. © 2014 American Cancer Society.

Context.— Gynecologic cytopathology is a heavily regulated field, with Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 mandating the collection of many quality metrics. There is a lack of consensus regarding methods to collect, monitor, and benchmark these data and how these data should be used in a quality assurance program. Furthermore, the introduction of human papilloma virus testing and proficiency testing has provided more data to monitor. Objective.— To determine good laboratory practices in quality assurance of gynecologic cytopathology. Data Sources.— Data were collected through a written survey consisting of 98 questions submitted to 1245 Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments–licensed or Department of Defense laboratories. There were 541 usable responses. Additional input was sought through a Web posting of results and questions on the College of American Pathologists Web site. Four senior authors who authored the survey and 28 cytopathologists and cytotechnologists were assigned to 5 working groups to analyze data and present statements on good laboratory practices in gynecologic cytopathology at the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference. Ninety-eight attendees at the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytopathology Quality Consensus Conference discussed and voted on good laboratory practice statements to obtain consensus. Conclusions.— This paper describes the rationale, background, process, and strengths and limitations of a series of papers that summarize good laboratory practice statements in quality assurance in gynecologic cytopathology.

Abstract The terminology for human papillomavirus (HPV)–associated squamous lesions of the lower anogenital tract has a long history marked by disparate diagnostic terms derived from multiple specialties. It often does not reflect current knowledge of HPV biology and pathogenesis. A consensus process was convened to recommend terminology unified across lower anogenital sites. The goal was to create a histopathologic nomenclature system that reflects current knowledge of HPV biology, optimally uses available biomarkers, and facilitates clear communication across different medical specialties. The Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology (LAST) Project was cosponsored by the College of American Pathologists and the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology and included 5 working groups; 3 work groups performed comprehensive literature reviews and developed draft recommendations. Another work group provided the historical background and the fifth will continue to foster implementation of the LAST recommendations. After an open comment period, the draft recommendations were presented at a consensus conference attended by LAST work group members, advisors, and representatives from 35 stakeholder organizations including professional societies and government agencies. Recommendations were finalized and voted on at the consensus meeting. The final, approved recommendations standardize biologically relevant histopathologic terminology for HPV-associated squamous intraepithelial lesions and superficially invasive squamous carcinomas across all lower anogenital tract sites and detail the appropriate use of specific biomarkers to clarify histologic interpretations and enhance diagnostic accuracy. A plan for disseminating and monitoring recommendation implementation in the practicing community was also developed. The implemented recommendations will facilitate communication between pathologists and their clinical colleagues and improve accuracy of histologic diagnosis with the ultimate goal of providing optimal patient care.

Abstract Rationale Bronchoscopically collected cytology specimens are commonly used to obtain a diagnosis of cancer in patients with pulmonary lesions. However, the sensitivity of cytology is suboptimal, especially for peripheral lesions less than 2 cm in diameter. Objectives We assessed the performance of a testing algorithm using cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) as part of clinical practice. Methods Bronchial brushing specimens (n = 343) were obtained from patients undergoing bronchoscopy for indeterminate pulmonary lesions. Routine cytology was performed and specimens without a positive diagnosis (n = 294) were analyzed by FISH, using residual brushing material. Pathology-confirmed lung cancer or clinical/radiographic evidence of disease was considered diagnostic of malignancy. Measurements and Main Results Routine cytology had a sensitivity and specificity of 41% (23 of 56) and 100% (45 of 45) for central lesions and 20% (26 of 133) and 100% (109 of 109) for peripheral nodules, respectively. FISH detected an additional 32% of lung cancers (18 central and 43 peripheral) not detectable by cytology alone, while producing false positive diagnoses in 22% (10 of 45) and 6% (6 of 109) benign central and peripheral lesions, respectively. In peripheral nodules, FISH detected (relative to routine cytology) an additional 44% (15 of 34) and 28% (25 of 91) of lung cancers less than 2 cm and 2 cm or more in size, respectively. A positive FISH result had a likelihood ratio of 1.45 and 5.87 for central and peripheral lesions and 3.44 and 15.38 for peripheral nodules less than 2 cm and 2 cm or more in size, respectively. Conclusions FISH testing significantly increases the detection of lung cancer over routine cytology alone. It is especially useful for peripheral nodules.

Abstract The goal of this study was to assess the performance characteristics of the Automated Cellular Imaging System (ACIS III) for HER2 immunohistochemical analysis. The study was performed on 187 biopsy slides from patients who underwent HER2 testing between January and February 2008. Three scoring methods by the ACIS III were compared with the manual score and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) results for HER2 amplification. The equal distribution score (EQD) method, in which 2 areas each of high-, moderate-, and low-intensity staining were measured, most closely matched the FISH HER2 amplification result. The numbers of immunohistochemically negative (0 or 1+)/FISH+ cases were equivalent for all methods. The EQD method had significantly fewer 2+ cases (n = 16) (P < .001) vs the manual method (n = 35) and yielded a higher positive predictive value (38%) for HER2 amplification compared with the manual method (20%). The EQD method may more accurately identify FISH-amplified HER2 cases with fewer 2+ cases that would be “reflexed” to FISH compared with the manual method.