From the Departments of Pathology (Ronen, Al-Rohil, Keiser, Jour, Nagarajan, Tetzlaff, Curry, Ivan, Middleton, Torres-Cabala, Aung, Prieto).
Ronen, Al-Rohil, and Keiser contributed equally to this work.
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2021 Dec 1;145(12):1505-1515. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2020-0620-OA.
CONTEXT.—: Accurate diagnosis of melanocytic lesions is fundamental for appropriate clinical management.
OBJECTIVE.—: To evaluate the degree of discordance, if any, between histopathologic diagnoses of melanocytic lesions at referring institutions and at a tertiary referral cancer center and the potential impact of such discordance on clinical management.
DESIGN.—: We retrospectively identified all patients referred to our comprehensive cancer center for evaluation of a melanocytic lesion from January 2010 to January 2011. For each patient, the histopathologic diagnosis from the referring institution was compared with the histopathologic diagnosis from a dermatopathologist at our center. Discordances were classified as major if they resulted in a change in clinical management and minor if they did not.
RESULTS.—: A total of 1521 cases were included. The concordance rates were 72.2% (52 of 72) for dysplastic nevus, 75.0% (15 of 20) for all other types of nevi, 91.1% (143 of 157) for melanoma in situ, 96.1% (758 of 789) for invasive melanoma, and 99.6% (478 of 480) for metastatic melanoma. Major discordances were found in 20.2% of cases (307 of 1521), and minor discordances were found in 48.8% of cases (742 of 1521). Compared with the guideline-based treatment recommendation based on the referring-institution diagnosis, the guideline-based treatment recommendation based on the cancer center diagnosis was more extensive in 5.9% (89 of 1521) of patients and less extensive in 5.0% (76 of 1521) of patients.
CONCLUSIONS.—: Our findings underscore the importance of secondary histopathologic review of melanocytic lesions by expert dermatopathologists because significant changes in the diagnosis, tumor classification, and/or staging may be identified, thus, resulting in critical changes in recommendations for clinical management.
准确诊断黑素细胞病变对于适当的临床管理至关重要。
评估转诊机构和三级转诊癌症中心的病理医生对黑素细胞病变的病理诊断之间是否存在差异,如果存在差异,这种差异对临床管理的潜在影响。
我们回顾性地确定了 2010 年 1 月至 2011 年 1 月期间因黑素细胞病变到我们综合癌症中心就诊的所有患者。对于每位患者,将转诊机构的病理诊断与我们中心的皮肤科病理医生的病理诊断进行比较。如果诊断结果改变了临床管理,则认为存在主要差异,如果没有改变则认为存在次要差异。
共纳入 1521 例患者。结果显示,发育不良性痣的一致性率为 72.2%(52/72),其他类型痣为 75.0%(15/20),原位黑素瘤为 91.1%(143/157),侵袭性黑素瘤为 96.1%(758/789),转移性黑素瘤为 99.6%(478/480)。20.2%(307/1521)的病例存在主要差异,48.8%(742/1521)的病例存在次要差异。与基于转诊机构诊断的指南推荐的治疗相比,基于癌症中心诊断的指南推荐的治疗在 5.9%(89/1521)的患者中更为广泛,在 5.0%(76/1521)的患者中更为局限。
我们的研究结果强调了由专家皮肤科病理医生对黑素细胞病变进行二次病理复查的重要性,因为可能会发现诊断、肿瘤分类和/或分期的重大变化,从而导致临床管理建议的重大变化。