Cytologic diagnosis of "atypical" in serous fluid cytopathology. Approach of the international system for reporting serous fluid cytopathology

The International System for Reporting Serous Fluid Cytopathology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies

This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis of The International System (TIS) for reporting serous fluid cytopathology. Our aims were to present the pooled malignancy rate of each TIS reporting category and the diagnostic accuracy of cytology using this system. Database search using a predefined strategy was followed by study selection, data extraction, study quality assessment, and statistical analysis. Data derived from 16 eligible studies were pooled. The pooled rates of malignancy were as follows: 27% (95% CI; 16%-41%) for "nondiagnostic" (ND), 11% (95% CI; 7%-18%) for negative for malignancy" (NFM), 49% (95% CI; 37%-61%) for "atypia of undetermined significance" (AUS), 90% (95% CI; 81%-95%) for "suspicious for malignancy" (SFM), and 100% (95% CI; 98%-100%) for "positive for malignancy" (MAL). Studies performed exclusively in cancer hospitals showed higher pooled malignancy rates, compared with academic and community hospitals serving the general population, in the ND [40% (95% CI; 21%-62%) vs. 22% (95% CI; 11%-39%)], NFM [20% (95% CI; 13%-30%) vs. 9% (95% CI; 5%-17%)], and AUS categories [55% (95% CI; 47%-63%) vs. 46% (95% CI; 31%-62%)]. Notably, the difference was significant in the NFM category ( P =0.04). When both SFM and MAL cytology interpretations were considered as malignant outcomes, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 68.74% (95% CI; 59.90%-76.39%) and 98.81% (95% CI; 98.18%-99.22%), respectively. In addition, the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was found to be 170.7 (95% CI; 96.2-303.3). Despite its strengths, our study also had some limitations. Therefore, future large-scale longitudinal studies could strengthen the findings of this review.

Leveraging thoughtful quality metric selection for individual and system improvements: the atypical category and use of dashboards

Quality management is integral to the practice of cytopathology, especially given the heavily manual workflows and expanding ancillary testing requirements inherent to the cytopathology laboratory. Monitoring quality data like turnaround time, specimen unsatisfactory rates, and diagnostic category utilization rates allows for better understanding of performance with opportunities for targeted improvement if there are variations from that which is expected. However, there are costs to quality monitoring including the time and resources needed, and, in already taxed systems, quality management risks being viewed as just another box to check. While there are mandated quality metrics that must be collected by cytology laboratories, thoughtful selection of key performance indicators can be of tremendous benefit in helping to better understand complex laboratory processes and directing improvement endeavors where needed. The following short communication is a discussion on quality management in the cytopathology laboratory from 3 Cytopathology Quality Management Directors. The discussion focuses on monitoring the atypical reporting category with an emphasis on how trending and visualizing quality metrics can provide laboratories with key data.

Risk of malignancy assessment of the International System for Reporting Serous Fluid Cytopathology: Experience in a community hospital setting and comparison with other studies

BACKGROUND

The International System for Reporting Serous Fluid Cytopathology (ISRSFC) was published recently to provide standard reporting terminology for serous fluid. To date, several ISRSFC reclassification studies have reported a wide range of diagnostic category frequency and the associated risk of malignancy (ROM). Herein, the authors applied the ISRSFC to report pleural and peritoneal effusions retrospectively in a community hospital setting.

METHODS

With Internal Review Board approval, 446 peritoneal effusion specimens and 299 pleural fluid specimens from 576 patients in three community hospitals over a 12-month period were reviewed and reclassified according to the ISRSFC.

RESULTS

After reclassification, in pleural effusions, 18 (5.0%) were nondiagnostic (ND), 273 (76.0%) were negative for malignancy (NFM), 18 (5.0%) were atypia of undetermined significance (AUS), 6 (1.7%) were suspicious for malignancy (SFM), and 44 (12.3%) were malignant (MAL). In peritoneal effusions, after reclassification, 11 (5.5%) were ND, 168 (77.1%) were NFM, 9 (4.1%) were AUS, 2 (0.9%) were SFM, and 27 (12.4%) were MAL. The calculated ROM was 0.0% for ND, 1.8% for NFM, 37.5% for AUS, 83.3% for SFM, and 100.0% for MAL in peritoneal effusions; and the ROM was 8.3% for ND, 1.2% for NFM, 44.4% for AUS, and 100.0% for both SFM and MAL in pleural effusions. Further analysis demonstrated notable heterogeneity among published ISRSFC reclassification studies, although the overall ROMs did not differ significantly from the ISRSFC-determined ROMs (all p values were > .05 for mean ROM comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggested the necessity for each laboratory to perform its own ROM analysis based on its statistics for ISRSFC-tiered classification terminology.

Cytomorphological and immunohistochemical features of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in serous fluids

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) represents the most common primary pancreatic malignancy. An understanding of the cytomorphologic features of conventional ductal adenocarcinoma and its variants is important to ensure accurate diagnoses.

METHODS

The clinicopathological and cytological data of serous fluids in PDAC patients were obtained from the electronic medical records and pathology database. All samples were analyzed and reclassified according to the "The International System for Reporting Serous Fluid Cytopathology" guidelines. Cytomorphologic features were examined with SurePath automatically prepared slides and stained using the Pap method in malignant (MAL) effusion specimens from 21 patients with PDAC. Immunocytochemical staining was conducted on 12 cell blocks from MAL PDAC effusion.

RESULTS

A total of 137 serous fluids specimens of PDACs were included, among which 61 (44.5%), 9 (6.6%), 13 (9.5%), 52 (38.0%), and 2 (1.5%) patients were classified into malignancy, suspicious for malignancy, atypia of undetermined significance, negative for malignancy and nondiagnostic groups, respectively. The key cytologic features for the conventional type of PDAC included cohesive clusters of ductal cells in glandular crowding and disorganized "drunken honeycomb" pattern or intercalated duct-like structure with anisonucleosis, cytoplasmic vacuoles, and concomitant "Indian-file" configuration. Undifferentiated carcinoma was comprised of enlarged, undifferentiated, pleomorphic MAL cells. Adenosquamous carcinoma could show glandular and/or squamous differentiation. Colloid carcinoma was composed of three-dimensional cancer cell clusters floating in thick mucin.

CONCLUSION

Crowding and disorganized "drunken honeycomb" pattern or intercalated duct-like structure with anisonucleosis, may represent an important clue for diagnosing PDAC in serous fluids. Immunocytochemical staining in combination with review of medical records and cytomorphological data can serve as useful adjuncts for distinguishing between PDAC and its variants.