From the Department of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California (Devereaux).
Devereaux is currently with the Department of Pathology, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York.
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2022 Sep 1;146(9):1062-1071. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2021-0166-CP.
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.
肿瘤细胞评估已成为分子肿瘤学检测的重要组成部分;然而,目前在这个检测过程中潜在的可变步骤,并没有最佳实践建议或指南。
描述国内和国际肿瘤细胞评估的实践情况,并确定实验室实践的差异如何影响肿瘤细胞评估的准确性。
数据来自于参加 2019 年美国病理学家学院肿瘤细胞熟练程度测试调查(NEO-B 2019)的 57 个美国和国际实验室。NEO-B 2019 包括 29 个实验室实践问题和 5 个展示具有挑战性的组织学特征的图像。参与者评估了苏木精-伊红染色数字图像的肿瘤细胞密度,并将结果与手动细胞计数得出的标准进行比较。
调查回复显示,肿瘤细胞评估的实验室实践存在差异,包括肿瘤细胞密度的定义、评估方法、计数实践和质量保证实践。在某些情况下,实验室实践的差异会影响肿瘤细胞密度的评估性能。
结果强调了需要对肿瘤细胞评估达成共识定义并加以改进标准化。我们提出了一系列最佳实践建议,以开始标准化肿瘤细胞评估的进程。