Rodriguez, Vilmarie

Instruction in hematopathology at Mayo Medical School has evolved from instructor‐guided direct inspection under the light microscope (laboratory method), to photomicrographs of glass slides with classroom projection (projection method). These methods have not been compared directly to date. Forty‐one second‐year medical students participated in this pilot study, a prospective, randomized, crossover study measuring educational performance during a hematology pathophysiology course. The students were randomized to one of two groups. All students received the same didactic lectures in the classroom and subsequent case‐based review of peripheral blood smears using either laboratory or projection methods, on day one with a crossover to the other method on day two. Pre‐ and post‐test examinations centered on morphology recognition measured educational performance on each day, followed by a questionnaire identifying the student's favored method. There was no significant difference in the pre‐test and post‐test scores between the two teaching methods (rank‐sum P = 0.43). Students overwhelmingly preferred the projection method and perceived it as superior (76%), although post‐test scores were not significantly different. Student's recommended method was split with 50% favoring the projection method, 43% favoring a combined approach, and 23% noting logistical challenges to the laboratory. In this study, the laboratory and projection method were equivalent in terms of educational performance for hematopathology among medicals students. A classroom‐based approach such as the projection method is favored, given the large class sizes in undergraduate medical education, as well as the ergonomic challenges and additional resources required for large group instruction in a laboratory setting. Anat Sci Educ 7: 130–134. © 2013 American Association of Anatomists.

Abstract Osteoblastic metastases and osteosarcoma can avidly concentrate bone-seeking radiopharmaceuticals. We sought to increase effectiveness of high-dose 153Samarium ethylenediaminetetramethylenephosphonate (153Sm-EDTMP, Quadramet) on osteosarcomas using a radiosensitizer, gemcitabine. Fourteen patients with osteoblastic lesions were treated with 30 mCi/kg 153Sm-EDTMP. Gemcitabine was administered 1 day after samarium infusion. Residual total body radioactivity was within the safe range of <3.6 mCi on day +14 (1.1 ± 0.4 mCi; range, 0.67-1.8 mCi). All patients received autologous stem cell reinfusion 2 weeks after 153Sm to correct expected grade 4 hematopoietic toxicity. Peripheral blood progenitor cells were infused in 11 patients; three patients had marrow infused. Blood count recovery was uneventful after peripheral blood progenitor cells in 11 of 11 patients. Toxicity from a single infusion of gemcitabine (1,500 mg/m2) in combination with 153Sm-EDTMP was minimal (pancytopenia). However, toxicity from a daily gemcitabine regimen (250 mg/m2/d × 4-5 days) was excessive (grade 3 mucositis) in one of two patients. There were no reported episodes of hemorrhagic cystitis (hematuria) or nephrotoxicity. At the 6- to 8-week follow-up, there were six partial remissions, two mixed responses, and six patients with progressive disease. In the 12 patients followed >1 year, there have been no durable responses. Thus, although high-dose 153Sm-EDTMP + gemcitabine has moderate palliative activity (improved pain; radiologic responses) in this poor-risk population, additional measures of local and systemic control are required for durable control of relapsed osteosarcoma with osteoblastic lesions. The strategy of radioactive drug binding to a target followed by a radiosensitizer may provide synergy and improved response rate.