Otis, Christopher N.

Context.— In 2016, the College of American Pathologists published an evidence-based guideline to develop recommendations for interpretive diagnostic error reduction in anatomic pathology. New evidence, together with evolving practice environments and the continued adoption of digital technologies, including artificial intelligence, has prompted a review of the guideline. Objective.— To assess evidence published since the release of the original guideline and update evidence-based recommendations for the reduction of diagnostic errors. Design.— The College of American Pathologists, in collaboration with the Association of Directors of Anatomic and Subspecialty Pathology, convened a panel of experts to update the 2016 evidence-based guideline. A systematic literature review was conducted to address 4 key questions. Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach, recommendations were created based on the available evidence, certainty of that evidence, and key judgments as defined in the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Results.— Two strong recommendations and 4 good practice statements were established for the reduction of diagnostic error. Conclusions.— The expert panel recommends that anatomic pathologists implement procedures for the review of pathology cases to detect and correct potential interpretive errors to improve patient outcomes.

AimsMucoepidermoid carcinomas (MEC) are the most common malignant neoplasms of salivary glands, but are uncommon in other sites. Salivary gland MEC are most frequently associated with CRTC1–MAML2 translocations. Exceedingly rare MEC of the breast demonstrate a basal‐like and often triple (oestrogen and progesterone receptor, HER2)‐negative immunophenotype, with a single case previously reported to show MAML2 rearrangement, although the fusion partner was not known. Comprehensive genomic studies of breast MEC are lacking. In this study, we analysed the immunophenotype and molecular landscape of two breast MEC to elucidate the pathogenesis of these rare tumours.Methods and resultsTwo breast MEC were subjected to capture‐based next‐generation DNA sequencing of 479 cancer‐related genes. The presence of the CRTC1–MAML2 fusion transcript was interrogated by reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction. In addition, the immunoprofiles of breast MEC were compared to salivary gland MEC. Both breast MEC harboured CRTC1–MAML2 fusions. In contrast to most triple‐negative breast carcinomas of no special type, the mutational burden of MEC was very low, with one case demonstrating only an inactivating SETD2 mutation, and the other harbouring no somatic variants in genes on the panel. No copy number alterations were identified. The immunoprofiles of breast and salivary gland MEC were overlapping, but not identical.ConclusionsThe findings highlight MEC as a breast cancer subtype more closely related to its salivary gland counterpart than to basal‐like/triple‐negative breast cancers of no special type.

Context Additional reviews of diagnostic surgical and cytology cases have been shown to detect diagnostic discrepancies. Objective To develop, through a systematic review of the literature, recommendations for the review of pathology cases to detect or prevent interpretive diagnostic errors. Design The College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center in association with the Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology convened an expert panel to develop an evidence-based guideline to help define the role of case reviews in surgical pathology and cytology. A literature search was conducted to gather data on the review of cases in surgical pathology and cytology. Results The panel drafted 5 recommendations, with strong agreement from open comment period participants ranging from 87% to 93%. The recommendations are: (1) anatomic pathologists should develop procedures for the review of selected pathology cases to detect disagreements and potential interpretive errors; (2) anatomic pathologists should perform case reviews in a timely manner to avoid having a negative impact on patient care; (3) anatomic pathologists should have documented case review procedures that are relevant to their practice setting; (4) anatomic pathologists should continuously monitor and document the results of case reviews; and (5) if pathology case reviews show poor agreement within a defined case type, anatomic pathologists should take steps to improve agreement. Conclusions Evidence exists that case reviews detect errors; therefore, the expert panel recommends that anatomic pathologists develop procedures for the review of pathology cases to detect disagreements and potential interpretive errors, in order to improve the quality of patient care.

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.