Marshall, Carrie B.

Abstract Matrix-producing tumors of the sinonasal region are diagnostically challenging, with a large number of similar-appearing neoplasms having different prognoses, treatment strategies, and genetic syndrome associations. Osteochondromyxoma (OCM) is a very rare tumor known to be associated with Carney complex. Since its initial description in 2001, fewer than 20 cases have been reported, with the sinonasal tract being an apparently favored site. Herein we describe 6 new cases of sinonasal OCM.OCM cases with available slides were retrieved from the surgical pathology files of the authors’ practices. The tumors arose in 4 boys and 2 girls, ranging from 4 to 17 years (mean, 9.5 years). All presented with nasal obstruction and a mass. Radiologically the tumors presented as indolent-appearing, heterogeneous, calcified, expansile masses. Histologically the tumors all consisted of bland, normochromatic spindled to stellate cells in a myxoid to collagenized stroma, with variable amounts of cartilage and bone formation. Mitotic activity was very low and necrosis was absent. All demonstrated complete loss of PRKAR1A expression by immunohistochemistry. Of these 6 cases, 3 had been originally diagnosed as nasal chondromesenchymal hamartomas, and one as osteosarcoma. Treatment and follow up information were available for 5 patients: all were treated with surgery, with one also receiving chemotherapy after an initial osteosarcoma diagnosis. At the time of last clinical follow-up, all 5 patients were alive, one with residual disease. No patient was known to have other stigmata of Carney complex.Although rare, OCM preferentially occurs in the sinonasal tract, and therefore may be encountered by head and neck pathologists. Given their predilection for young patients and overlapping morphologic features, OCM are easily misdiagnosed as other matrix-forming sinonasal tumors, especially nasal chondromesenchymal hamartoma. Immunohistochemical demonstration of PRKAR1A loss is valuable for confirming an OCM diagnosis, which should prompt clinical investigation for the possibility of Carney complex.

Biospecimens acquired during routine medical practice are the primary sources of molecular information about patients and their diseases that underlies precision medicine and translational research. In cancer care, molecular analysis of biospecimens is especially common because it often determines treatment choices and may be used to monitor therapy in real time. However, patient specimens are collected, handled, and processed according to routine clinical procedures during which they are subjected to factors that may alter their molecular quality and composition. Such artefactual alteration may skew data from molecular analyses, render analysis data uninterpretable, or even preclude analysis altogether if the integrity of a specimen is severely compromised. As a result, patient care and safety may be affected, and medical research dependent on patient samples may be compromised. Despite these issues, there is currently no requirement to control or record preanalytical variables in clinical practice with the single exception of breast cancer tissue handled according to the guideline jointly developed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists (CAP) and enforced through the CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program. Recognizing the importance of molecular data derived from patient specimens, the CAP Personalized Healthcare Committee established the Preanalytics for Precision Medicine Project Team to develop a basic set of evidence-based recommendations for key preanalytics for tissue and blood specimens. If used for biospecimens from patients, these preanalytical recommendations would ensure the fitness of those specimens for molecular analysis and help to assure the quality and reliability of the analysis data.

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.