Neoplastic Cellularity Assessment in Molecular Testing

Author:

Devereaux Kelly A.12,Souers Rhona J.3,Graham Rondell P.4,Portier Bryce P5,Surrey Lea F.6,Yemelyanova Anna7,Vasalos Patricia8,Trembath Dimitri G.9,Moncur Joel T.10

Affiliation:

1. From the Department of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California (Devereaux).

2. Devereaux is currently with the Department of Pathology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York.

3. From the Biostatistics Department (Souers), College of American Pathologists, Northfield, Illinois.

4. From the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (Graham).

5. From the Medical Affairs Department, Agilent Technologies Inc, Santa Clara, California (Portier).

6. From the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (Surrey).

7. From the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York (Yemelyanova).

8. From Proficiency Testing (Vasalos), College of American Pathologists, Northfield, Illinois.

9. From the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill (Trembath).

10. From the Office of the Director, The Joint Pathology Center, Silver Spring, Maryland (Moncur).

Abstract

Context.— Neoplastic cellularity assessment has become an essential component of molecular oncology testing; however, there are currently no best practice recommendations or guidelines for this potentially variable step in the testing process. Objective.— To describe the domestic and international practices of neoplastic cellularity assessment and to determine how variations in laboratory practices affect neoplastic cellularity assessment accuracy. Design.— Data were derived from 57 US and international laboratories that participated in the 2019 College of American Pathologists Neoplastic Cellularity Proficiency Testing Survey (NEO-B 2019). NEO-B 2019 included 29 laboratory practice questions and 5 images exhibiting challenging histologic features. Participants assessed the neoplastic cellularity of hematoxylin-eosin–stained digital images, and results were compared to a criterion standard derived from a manual cell count. Results.— The survey responses showed variations in the laboratory practices for the assessment of neoplastic cellularity, including the definition of neoplastic cellularity, assessment methodology, counting practices, and quality assurance practices. In some instances, variation in laboratory practice affected neoplastic cellularity assessment performance. Conclusions.— The results highlight the need for a consensus definition and improved standardization of the assessment of neoplastic cellularity. We put forth an initial set of best practice recommendations to begin the process of standardizing neoplastic cellularity assessment.

Publisher

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Subject

Medical Laboratory Technology,General Medicine,Pathology and Forensic Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3