Baban, Farah

Objective A follow-up of women 50 years or older with concomitant positive high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) genotypes other than 16 and 18 (hrHPVO) and negative Pap test (NILMPap) was conducted to better understand the implications of hrHPVO positivity on potential risk of developing significant high-grade lesions. Material and Methods A retrospective review of 2014 cytology data of patients with co-testing (Pap test and HPV DNA) identified 85 women 50 years or older with NILMPap and hrHPVO+. Results Most patients (63) had repeat co-testing on next follow-up. Of these, 41 patients with persistent hrHPVO+ status, 3 developed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 (CIN2), and 1 CIN3. Nineteen patients were followed with biopsies. Of these, 7 biopsies were abnormal, 5 of which showed low-grade (CIN1) and 2 high-grade (CIN3) histology; none progressed on further follow-up. Three patients were followed with Pap test only, all had NILMPap, and none progressed on further follow-up. In summary, of the 85 patients, 26 developed abnormal histology during follow-up, 6 of whom had high-grade histology (CIN2 and CIN3, 3 each). The 5-year risk of CIN1+ in this cohort was 43.8% and for CIN2+ was 12.3%. The risk of abnormal histology did not differ significantly by prior history of Pap tests, histology, and/or HPV results. Conclusions A persistent positivity for hrHPVO indicated higher likelihood to develop a lesion, and this risk was not reduced for patients 50 and older compared with the published screening population risk.

AbstractIntroductionIn evaluating malignant pleural fluid cytology, metastatic adenocarcinomas and mesotheliomas are often differential diagnoses. GATA binding protein 3 (GATA3) has historically been used to confirm metastatic breast carcinomas; however, GATA3 has low specificity if mesothelioma is included in differential diagnoses. Trichorhinophalangeal syndrome type 1 (TRPS1) protein is expressed in all types of breast carcinomas, with reported high specificity and sensitivity. We investigated the performance of TRPS1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) and compared it to GATA3 in pleural fluids diagnosed with metastatic breast carcinoma and mesothelioma.MethodsThirty‐six consecutive ThinPrep pleural fluids and 4 pleural fine needle aspirations (FNAs) with diagnoses of metastatic breast carcinoma (21) and mesothelioma (19) were retrieved, and IHC with TRPS1 and GATA3 was performed on all. Immunoreactivity scores for TRPS1 were calculated by multiplying percentage of immunoreactive cells by staining intensity. Immunoreactivity scores were negative if 0 or 1, low positive if 2, intermediate positive if 3 or 4, or high positive if 6 or 9. Nuclear immunoreactivity of ≥10% with at least moderate intensity was judged GATA3 positive.ResultsGATA3 showed immunoreactivity in all metastatic breast carcinomas and 84% of mesotheliomas. TRPS1 was immunoreactive in all breast carcinoma cases (18 with a score of 9 and 3 with a score of 6). TRPS1 showed low positivity in 5% of mesothelioma cases with all other cases being negative.ConclusionWhen cytomorphologic differential diagnoses of mesothelioma exist, TRPS1 is a more specific marker than GATA3 for confirmation of metastatic breast carcinoma in pleural fluid cytology.

Abstract Background Pemphigoid gestationis (PG) and polymorphic eruption of pregnancy (PEP) are pregnancy‐related dermatoses. Definitive diagnosis often relies upon histopathology and direct immunofluorescence (DIF). PG is associated with fetal and neonatal risks, while PEP confers minimal risk. Objective We aimed to compare histopathologic features to determine key differentiators. Methods A retrospective cohort study of PG and PEP cases, with accompanying DIF, conducted from 1995 to 2020. Skin biopsies were examined independently in a blinded fashion by two dermatopathologists for a list of histopathological features. Results Twenty‐one cases of PG and 10 cases of PEP were identified. PG had significantly denser eosinophils than PEP (mean 155 vs. 48 cells/5 hpf; p < 0.018). PG was also noted to have eosinophilic spongiosis and eosinophils at the dermal–epidermal junction more frequently compared to PEP (80% PG vs. 10% PEP; p < 0.001). A mean cutoff value of 86 eosinophils and a mean optimal sensitivity and specificity of 81% and 83%, respectively, for eosinophils density's diagnostic power of PEP versus PG were achieved. Subepithelial separation was exclusively seen in PG (40% vs. 0%; p < 0.007). Conclusion Eosinophilic spongiosis, eosinophilic epitheliotropism, and dense superficial dermal eosinophils were diagnostic of PG. Given overlapping clinicopathologic features, however, DIF results with clinicopathologic correlation, remain the gold standard.