Kurtycz, Daniel F. I.

BackgroundFine needle aspiration (FNA) is commonly used for the preoperative evaluation of salivary gland tumors. Tumor grade is a key factor influencing clinical management of salivary gland carcinomas (SGCs). To assess the ability to grade nonbasaloid SGCs in FNA specimens, an international panel of cytopathologists convened to review and score SGC cases.MethodsThe study cohort included 61 cases of primary SGC from the pathology archives of 3 tertiary medical centers. Cases from 2005 to 2016 were selected, scanned, and digitized. Nineteen cytopathologists blinded to the histologic diagnosis reviewed the digitized cytology slides and graded them as low, high, or indeterminate. The panelists' results were then compared to the tumor grades based on histopathologic examination of the corresponding resection specimens.ResultsAll but 2 of the 19 (89.5%) expert panelists review more than 20 salivary gland FNAs per year; 16 (84.2%) of the panelists work at academic medical centers, and 13 (68.4%) have more than 10 years' experience. Participants had an overall accuracy of 89.4% in the grading of SGC cases, with 90.2% and 88.3% for low‐ and high‐grade SGC, respectively. Acinic cell carcinoma and mucoepidermoid carcinoma had the highest degree of accuracy, while epithelial‐myoepithelial carcinoma and salivary duct carcinoma had the lowest degree of accuracy. As expected, the intermediate‐grade SGC cases showed the greatest variability (high‐grade, 42.1%; low‐grade, 37.5%, indeterminate, 20.4%).ConclusionThis study confirms the high accuracy of cytomorphologic grading of primary SGC by FNA as low‐ or high‐grade. However, caution should be exercised when a grade cannot be confidently assigned.

BackgroundThe Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology (TBSRTC) offers a six‐tiered diagnostic scheme for thyroid Fine Needle Aspiration (FNA): Benign, Atypia of Undetermined Significance/Follicular Lesion of Undetermined Significance (AUS/FLUS), suspicious for follicular neoplasm, suspicious for malignancy, malignant, and unsatisfactory with an aim to standardize diagnostic criteria. Reported rate of AUS/FLUS category in the literature has varied from 3% to 20.5%.MethodsThe aim of this study was to assess interobserver variability among cytopathologists to assess reproducibility of the AUS/FLUS category. Seven cytopathologists brought FNA cases (a mixture of atypical and non‐atypical FNA diagnosis) diagnosed using TBSRTC from their respective institutions which were reviewed and diagnosed by the participants. The analysis assessed interobserver variability among 7 cytopathologists and determined characteristics on the slides which were associated with concordance to the institutional diagnosis.ResultsSeventy eight of 125 (62.4%) benign cases were classified as benign by the reviewers and 26 (21%) were called AUS/FLUS on review. A third of the AUS/FLUS cases were called benign on review and 28.2% were classified as suspicious for neoplasia/malignancy. Roughly a third each of the suspicious for follicular neoplasm/suspicious for malignancy cases were classified as AUS/FLUS.DiscussionWhen pathologists from different institutions shared their slides, concordance was high for specimens with adequate cellularity and those that were clearly benign but thresholds varied for the other indeterminate categories. Most definite categorization of the AUS/FLUS category was seen on review. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2017;45:399–405. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.