Lowe, Lori

AbstractBackgroundAppropriate use criteria (AUC) provide patient‐centered physician guidance in test selection. An initial set of AUC was reported by the American Society of Dermatopathology (ASDP) in 2018. AUC reflect evidence collected at single timepoints and may be affected by evolving evidence and experience. The objective of this study was to update and expand AUC for selected tests.MethodsRAND/UCLA (RAND Corporation [Santa Monica, CA]/University of California Los Angeles) methodology used includes the following: (a) literature review; (b) review of previously rated tests and previously employed clinical scenarios; (c) selection of previously rated tests for new ratings; (d) development of new clinical scenarios; (e) selection of additional tests; (f) three rating rounds with feedback and group discussion after rounds 1 and 2.ResultsFor 220 clinical scenarios comprising lymphoproliferative (light chain clonality), melanocytic (comparative genomic hybridization, fluorescence in situ hybridization, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, telomerase reverse transcriptase promoter), vascular disorders (MYC), and inflammatory dermatoses (periodic acid‐Schiff, Gömöri methenamine silver), consensus by panel raters was reached in 172 of 220 (78%) scenarios, with 103 of 148 (70%) rated “usually appropriate” or “rarely appropriate” and 45 of 148 (30%), “appropriateness uncertain.” Limitations: The study design only measures appropriateness. Cost, availability, test comparison, and additional clinical considerations are not measured. The possibility that the findings of this study may be influenced by the inherent biases of the dermatopathologists involved in the study cannot be excluded.ConclusionsAUC are reported for selected diagnostic tests in clinical scenarios that occur in dermatopathology practice. Adhering to AUC may reduce inappropriate test utilization and improve healthcare delivery.

BackgroundAppropriate use criteria (AUC) provide physicians guidance in test selection, and can affect health care delivery, reimbursement policy and physician decision‐making.ObjectivesThe American Society of Dermatopathology, with input from the American Academy of Dermatology and the College of American Pathologists, sought to develop AUC in dermatopathology.MethodsThe RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology, which combines evidence‐based medicine, clinical experience and expert judgment, was used to develop AUC in dermatopathology.ResultsWith the number of ratings predetermined at 3, AUC were developed for 211 clinical scenarios involving 12 ancillary studies. Consensus was reached for 188 (89%) clinical scenarios, with 93 (44%) considered “usually appropriate,” 52 (25%) “rarely appropriate” and 43 (20%) “uncertain appropriateness.”LimitationsThe methodology requires a focus on appropriateness without comparison between tests and irrespective of cost.ConclusionsThe ultimate decision of when to order specific test rests with the physician and is one where the expected benefit exceeds the negative consequences. This publication outlines the recommendations of appropriateness—AUC for 12 tests used in dermatopathology. Importantly, these recommendations may change considering new evidence. Results deemed “uncertain appropriateness” and where consensus was not reached may benefit from further research.

Abstract: Cellular blue nevomelanocytic lesions (CBNLs) frequently pose diagnostic problems to pathologists, and their biological potential may be difficult to establish. In this study, the authors have analyzed the clinical, histological, and outcome data of 37 cellular blue nevomelanocytic lesions and the molecular characteristics of 4 lesions. The cohort of cases comprised 8 cellular blue nevi (CBNs), 17 atypical cellular blue nevi (ACBNs), and 12 blue-nevus–like melanomas (BNLMs) with a mean follow-up of 5 years. The average age at diagnosis was 25.9 years for patients with ACBN, versus 30.4 years for CBN, and 44.6 years for BNLM. Both CBN and ACBN occurred most frequently on the trunk or extremities, whereas BNLM primarily involved the scalp. Histologically, CBN and ACBN were characterized by a mean diameter of <1 cm, absence of necrosis, low mitotic rate (mean: 1–2 mitotic figures/mm2), little or no infiltrative properties, and usually low-grade cytologic atypia. In contrast, BNLM had a mean diameter of 1.6 cm, necrosis, tissue infiltration, greater mitotic activity (mean: 6 mitotic figures/mm2), and high-grade cytologic atypia. ACBNs often were larger, more densely cellular, exhibited higher mitotic counts, and were cytologically more atypical than CBN. Seven CBN cases with follow-up had a benign clinical course (average follow-up of 4.7 years). Among 6 patients with ACBN who underwent sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy, 3 were positive, and a single additional case had 1 positive non-SLN (this patient did not have a SLN biopsy performed). All 14 cases of ACBN with follow-up were alive and without recurrence with mean follow-up of 5 years. Of the 9 melanoma cases with follow-up, 3 patients with SLN and non-SLN involvement died from their disease (average follow-up of 4.8 years). Array comparative genomic hybridization was performed on 2 ACBNs and 1 BNLM: One of the 2 ACBNs showed chromosomal aberrations and 1 BNLM showed multiple chromosomal gains and losses. Multiplex polymerase chain reaction was performed on 1 ACBN, and no mutations were found. From these results, the authors conclude that ACBN occupy an intermediate position within the spectrum of CBN and BNLM, yet many lesions cannot be reliably distinguished from either CBN or BNLM because of overlapping histologic features. However, in general, ACBNs seem to aggregate more closely with CBN in terms of clinical, histological, molecular profile (limited data), and biological behavior.