Acta Cytologica最新文献

Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare performance of individual categories between the Johns Hopkins template and the Paris system for reporting urinary cytology.

Methods: Medical records of patients with bladder biopsy and relevant cytology slides were obtained from archived material. Slides were reclassified according to Johns Hopkins template and the Paris system. Results were compared to histological diagnoses.

Results: BD SurePath preparations from 205 cases with biopsy follow-up (118 benign, 5 dysplasia, 23 low, and 59 malignant urothelial carcinoma [UC]) were reviewed. There were 2 inadequate specimens in each system. According to the Johns Hopkins template, there were 96 (46.8%) no urothelial atypia or malignancy, 37 (18%) atypical urothelial cells of uncertain significance (AUC-US), 21 (10.2%) atypical urothelial cells, cannot exclude high-grade urothelial carcinoma (HGUC), 38 (18.5%) HGUC, and 11 (5.4%) low-grade urothelial carcinoma (LGUC). The Paris system categorized 111 (54.1%) negative for high-grade urothelial carcinoma, 29 (14.1%) atypical urothelial cells (AUCs), 25 (12.2%) suspicious for HGUC (SHGUC), 36 (17.6%) HGUC, and 2 (1%) LGUC. The Johns Hopkins template had a sensitivity of 95.6%, specificity of 73.6%, positive predictive value of 61.5%, negative predictive value of 96.3, with an overall diagnostic accuracy of 79.8%. The Paris System had a sensitivity of 93.6%, specificity of 77.9%, positive predictive value of 65.6%, negative predictive value of 96.5, with an overall diagnostic accuracy of 82.8%. The risk of malignancy (ROM) for atypical category (AUC-US/AUC) in the Johns Hopkins template was 43.2%, while it has been 24.1% for the Paris System. The ROM for suspicious category was 47.6% and 68.0%, respectively. There were statistically significant differences between negative and atypical, suspicious, and HGUC categories in each system (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: Discrete negative or benign urine cytology had the same sensitivity and specificity between two systems. Although atypical category was associated with a higher ROM with the Hopkins template, the ROM for the suspicious category yielded better result with the Paris system.

Introduction: The aim of the study was to analyze the published evidence for the use of fallopian tube brush cytology for the early detection of extrauterine serous gynecological cancer.

Methods: We systematically searched the literature and, additionally, cross-checked on the bibliographies of selected articles. The inclusion criteria involved studies assessing the utility of fallopian tube brush cytology and its applications in the diagnosis, screening, or follow-up of extrauterine serous gynecological cancer.

Results: The search strategy resulted in 21 abstracts or full-text articles, 5 of which met the inclusion criteria. The year of publication ranged from 2016 to 2022, and a total of 193 fallopian tube samples were investigated. Cytobrush, Tubebrush©, and Cytuity™ were used to obtain salpingeal samples for liquid-based cytology evaluation.

Conclusions: Our findings indicate that, at present, there is a lack of satisfying evidence-based data in the literature which would support the implementation of fallopian tube brush cytology as an adjunctive tool for early detection of extrauterine serous gynecological cancer. Thus, we believe that there is need for well-designed clinical studies to assess the effectiveness and diagnostic accuracy of the method as well as to validate the cytological criteria for the diagnosis and prediction of gynecological malignancies.

Introduction: Early detection and accurate pathological assessment are critical to improving prognosis of pancreatic cancer. EUS has been widely used in diagnosing pancreatic lesions and can obtain histological diagnosis by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). However, comprehensive assessment of the interobserver agreement (IOA) among cytopathologists evaluating EUS-FNA specimens is still limited. Therefore, this study evaluated IOA among cytopathologists for EUS-FNA specimens of solid pancreatic lesions, especially in false-negative cases of cytological diagnosis and analyzed the factors that influence cytological diagnosis of EUS-FNA so as to improve the diagnostic efficiency of EUS-FNA.

Methods: We retrieved EUS-FNA samples of pancreatic solid lesions from 2017 to 2021 and collected their clinical/cytological data. Two cytopathologists independently reviewed these cases using a quoted, novel standardized cytology scoring tool. Ultimately, we calculated IOA among cytopathologists and performed a binary logistic regression analysis to evaluate factors influencing the cytological diagnosis of EUS-FNA.

Results: 161 patients were included, and 60 cases with a clinical diagnosis of pancreatic cancer but a cytological diagnosis of benign and atypical constituted the false-negative group. IOAs for cytological diagnosis of overall patients and the false-negative group were in perfect/moderate agreement with Kendall's W values of 0.896 and 0.462, respectively. The number of diagnostic cells in the scoring tool had the highest level of agreement (κ = 0.721) for overall patients. There was at best moderate agreement on other quantity and quality parameters for both all cases and false-negative group. Logistic regression analysis showed the number of diagnostic cells (OR = 6.110, p < 0.05) and amount of blood (OR = 0.320, p < 0.05) could influence cytological diagnosis.

Conclusions: The false-negative rate of our study as high as 37.26% (60/161) is mainly related to strict standards of cytopathologists, and their ability to standardize pancreatic cytology is still improving. Suboptimal agreement among cytopathologists for cytological diagnosis and the number of diagnostic cells may be associated with the occurrence of false-negative diagnosis. Further regression analysis confirmed that the number of diagnostic cells and obscuring blood were important factors in cytological diagnosis. Therefore, refinement of cytological diagnostic criteria, standardization of specimen quality evaluation, and training of cytopathologists may improve the agreement of cytopathologists, thus improving the repeatability of cytological diagnosis and reducing the occurrence of false-negative events.

Introduction: Increasing molecular evidence indicates that tubular adenoma of the breast is distinct from fibroepithelial lesions, leading to its reclassification as an epithelial tumor in the 5th World Health Organization classification of tumors of the breast. However, tubular adenoma remains poorly characterized on fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) and often not distinguished from fibroadenomas. In this study, the largest cohort, to date, of histologically confirmed aspirates of tubular adenomas were reviewed and compared with aspirates of fibroadenomas. Findings from this study further define the cytological features of tubular adenoma and allow differentiation from fibroadenoma.

Methodology: Aspirates of histologically confirmed tubular adenomas were reviewed for features of the background, myoepithelial, epithelial, and stromal components and then compared to a cohort of aspirates of fibroadenomas.

Results: Totally, 43 (tubular adenoma) and 94 (fibroadenoma) aspirates were included. Tubular adenomas displayed moderate epithelial cellularity with high cohesiveness, with stromal fragments containing epithelium. Tubules are more common in tubular adenomas (p = 0.009) and "tubular fragments" (tissue fragments containing multiple tubular structures with/without stroma) is a pathognomonic feature of tubular adenoma (p < 0.001). Calcification and fibrocystic changes were variably seen (4.65-13.5%) but without difference to fibroadenomas (p > 0.05). Cytomorphologically malignant features and mitoses were absent in all aspirates of tubular adenoma. Presence of tubules and stromal fragments were independent factors associated with tubular adenomas, whereas a predominance of large epithelial fragments and naked stromal fragments were associated with fibroadenomas.

Conclusion: Tubular adenomas are not only histologically and molecularly separate from fibroepithelial lesions but also a distinct entity on FNAC.

Introduction: Chondroblastoma (CB) is a rare, benign cartilage-producing tumor, typically affecting the epiphysis of long bones in skeletally immature individuals. There have been only limited case reports describing the cytomorphologic features of this tumor, and thus the cytopathologic diagnostic criteria are controversial. Herein, we report the cytologic findings of 10 CB cases, discuss the diagnostic criteria and critical differential diagnosis, along with a comprehensive review of the literature.

Methods: We performed a retrospective search of our cytopathology and surgical pathology databases for cases diagnosed as CB that had corresponding cytology specimens from four large medical institutions. All available cytopathology specimens were retrieved and reviewed. Clinicopathologic and radiologic data were recorded.

Results: Ten cases were retrieved from 8 patients aged 15-42 years (mean, 24 years), five of whom were males. Eight cases represented primary tumors while 2 cases were recurrences. Three cases occurred in the femur, two cases occurred in the humerus, while 1 case occurred in each of the glenoid, talus, and proximal phalanx of the 3rd toe. The cytologic diagnosis of CB was achieved in 7 cases. The neoplastic mononuclear cells were present in all cases and their cytologic features were similar. These cells displayed round to oval eccentric nuclei, evenly distributed chromatin, and inconspicuous nucleoli; few of which had nuclear indentations. Multinucleated giant cells were present in 9 cases (90%). Fragments of chondromyxoid matrix were present in 4 cases on cytologic preparations (40%). Cell blocks were available in 8 cases. Mononuclear and multinucleated giant cells were present in all adequate cell blocks and their cytologic features were identical to those seen in the smears. The chondroid matrix was present in only three of the adequate cell blocks (43%).

Conclusion: We concluded that with the appropriate clinical and radiologic setting, the diagnosis of CB can be achieved on cytology if characteristic chondroblasts are present. The presence of chondromyxoid matrix is a helpful clue but is not necessary for the diagnosis. As in surgical pathology, cytologic evaluation of bone tumors should be interpreted in conjunction with clinical and radiologic findings.

Introduction: This study aimed to clarify the diagnostic structural features in cytology specimens that are useful in subtyping non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) into adenocarcinoma (ADC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SQCC).

Methods: Cytology specimens (n = 233) of NSCLCs, which included ADCs (n = 149) and SQCCs (n = 84), were analyzed. The following cytological features were evaluated: isolated cell, flat sheet, three-dimensional cluster with irregular arrangement, papillary-like structure, micropapillary-like structure, acinar-like structure, palisading pattern, protrusion of nuclei at the periphery of the cluster, honeycomb pattern, streaming arrangement, three-dimensional sheets with regular arrangement, flattening at the periphery of the cluster, fuzzy pattern at the periphery of the cluster, and mutual inclusion.

Results: ADCs exhibited significantly higher frequencies of flat sheet (p < 0.001), papillary-like structure (p < 0.001), micropapillary-like structure (p = 0.028), acinar-like structure (p < 0.001), and protrusion of nuclei at the periphery of the cluster (p < 0.001) than SQCCs. The latter exhibited significantly higher frequencies of streaming arrangement (p < 0.001), three-dimensional sheets with regular arrangement (p < 0.001), flattening at the periphery of the cluster (p < 0.001), fuzzy pattern at the periphery of the cluster (p < 0.001), and mutual inclusion (p < 0.001) than ADCs.

Discussion: Cytological structural features, such as flat sheet, papillary-like structure, micropapillary-like structure, acinar-like structure, and protrusion of nuclei at the periphery of the cluster, indicated ADC, whereas streaming arrangement, three-dimensional sheets with regular arrangement, flattening at the periphery of the cluster, fuzzy pattern at the periphery of the cluster, and mutual inclusion indicated SQCC. Paying attention to these cytological structural features can enable the accurate subtyping of NSCLC into ADC and SQCC.

Introduction: BRAFV600E mutations have been associated with papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) histological types including tall-cell and classical, peritumoral infiltration, and nuclear signs, whereas cytological features such as plump cells and sickle nuclei have also been associated with favorable thyroid fine needle aspiration (FNA) results for this tumor. BRAF and RAS are considered early driver mutations that contribute to the development of BRAF-like PTCs and RAS-like PTCs. Our aim was to assess the possible association between all Bethesda System cytological features and thyroid FNAs for PTC and their potential predictive value for future BRAFV600E-related biopsies.

Methods: Our study analyzed 63 cases of PTCs operated on at our hospital over a 5-year period between 2005 and 2017 that had previously undergone FNA and had been classified by the Bethesda System. BRAFV600E was identified by pyrosequencing paraffin-embedded tissues and comparing the cytological signs with the Bethesda System. In addition, a statistical and predictive study of the diagnostic factors "non-follicular," "non-round nuclei," and "non-clear chromatin" was performed to discriminate BRAF-like signs from other hypothetical RAS-like follicular signs.

Results: BRAFV600E was detected in 43/63 cases (68.2%). Histological types were significant (p < 0.001), with the classical variant being the most prevalent 31/63 (49.2%) and independent by multivariate analysis odds ratio of 10.58 [2.67; 41.97]. Follicular cytological signs are negatively associated with BRAFV600E: follicular structure (p < 0.001), round nuclei (p = 0.015), and clear chromatin (p = 0.049), while the diagnostic factors: "non-follicular" (positive predictive value [PPV] 82.9, sensitivity 79.1, negative predictive value [NPV] 59.1, specificity 65.0), "non-round nuclei" (PPV 76.6, sensitivity 83.7, NPV 56.3, specificity 45.0), and "non-clear chromatin" (PPV 75.6, sensitivity 79.1, NPV 50.0, specificity 45.0) have predictive value for the mutation. There was no individual significance for the remaining cytological features.

Conclusions: Our study found no association between cytomorphological signs of thyroid FNA and BRAFV600E mutation. Considering the Bethesda System, there is an association (p = 0.045) with numerous cases of mutated PTC in categories V and VI. Our results indicate, however, that the presence of signs referred to as "non-follicular," "non-round nuclei," and "non-clear chromatin" in biopsy of papillary thyroid carcinoma is predictive of BRAF type mutation, whereas follicular signs indicate a RAS type PTC, according to published literature. These results need to be confirmed or modified by further research.

Introduction: Anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) is a rare mature T-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma characterized by large and pleomorphic neoplastic CD30-positive T cells. ALCL includes different subtypes with different clinical and biological features: systemic ALCL, primary cutaneous ALCL, breast implant-associated ALCL (BIA-ALCL). Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) is overexpressed and rearranged in some systemic cases. Diagnosis of ALCL may be challenging on cytological samples, but the correct diagnosis is mandatory for the management of the patient.

Methods: A retrospective series of 12 ALCLs diagnosed by cytology is reported. Cytological samples included lymph nodes and skin lesions fine needle aspiration cytology, peritoneal effusion, and periprosthetic fluid. Microscopic evaluation was performed on direct smears, cell-block sections, and cytocentrifugated slides. Immunocytochemistry was performed on cell-block sections, direct smears, and cytocentrifugated slides. Molecular evaluation by fluorescent in-situ hybridization (FISH) was performed on cell-block sections.

Results: The series included 4 ALK+ ALCLs, 5 ALK- ALCLs, and 3 BIA-ALCLs. FNAC was performed on lymph nodes in 8 cases and on skin lesion in 1 case. In this last case, a peritoneal effusion was also evaluated. Breast periprosthetic fluids were evaluated in 3 cases. A large immunocytochemical panel was performed in each case, and FISH in 3 cases, demonstrating ALK rearrangement in a case of ALK+ ALCL. A final diagnosis was rendered in all cases. In the case of skin lesion, the differential diagnosis between systemic ALCL and primary cutaneous ALCL was possible.

Conclusion: The cytological diagnosis of ALCL may be challenging, and the proper management of the collected sample is mandatory. The rapid on-site evaluation and the realization of a cell block are strongly recommended. Immunocytochemistry is mandatory for the diagnosis and a large antibodies panel is needed as differential diagnosis includes many different neoplasms. FISH may be useful to evaluate ALK rearrangements. When properly managed, cytology can lead to a reliable final diagnosis of ALCL.

The World Health Organization (WHO), the International Academy of Cytology, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer, with expert contributors from around the world, present an international approach to standardized reporting of pancreaticobiliary cytopathology. This reporting system is one of the first in a series from various body sites that mirror the WHO Classification of Tumours series and provides an evidence-based terminology system with associated risk of malignancy and diagnostic management recommendation per diagnostic category. The WHO Reporting System for Pancreaticobiliary Cytopathology (WHO system) revises the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology (PSC) system for Reporting Pancreaticobiliary Cytology published in 2015 and replaces the six-tiered system with a seven-tiered system: "insufficient/inadequate/nondiagnostic"; "benign (negative for malignancy)," "atypical," "pancreaticobiliary neoplasm of low risk/low grade," "pancreatic neoplasm of high risk/high grade," "suspicious for malignancy," and "malignant." The principal differences between the WHO and the PSC systems revolve around the classification of neoplasia. In the PSC system, there was a single category for "neoplastic" lesions that includes two groups, one for "benign neoplasms" [primarily serous cystadenoma] and one named "other," dominated by premalignant intraductal neoplasms (primarily intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms) and low-grade malignant neoplasms [pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) and solid pseudopapillary neoplasms (SPNs)]. In the WHO system, benign neoplasms with virtually no risk of malignancy are included in the "benign" category and low-grade malignancies (PanNET and SPN) are included in the "malignant" category, as per the WHO Classification of Digestive System Tumours, thus leaving in the "neoplasm" category primarily those noninvasive premalignant lesions of the ductal system. These neoplasms are divided by the cytomorphological grade of the epithelium into low risk/low-grade and high risk/high-grade, with distinctly different risks of malignancy. As with the PSC system, the WHO system advocates close correlation with imaging and encourages incorporation of ancillary testing into the final diagnosis, such as biochemical (CEA and amylase) and molecular testing of cyst fluid and bile duct brushings. Key diagnostic cytopathological features of specific lesions or neoplasms, ancillary studies for diagnostic and prognostic evaluation, and implications of diagnosis for patient care and management are discussed. In addition, the WHO system includes reporting and diagnostic management options that recognize the variations in the availability of diagnostic and prognostic ancillary testing modalities in low- and middle-income countries, where cytopathology is particularly useful and is increasingly available in the absence of histopathological services.