Misleading terminology in pathology: lack of definitions hampers communication

From classroom to clinic: evaluating a clinical pathology course to strengthen pathology report literacy of medical interns

BACKGROUND

Pathology reports serve as the primary communication tool between pathologists and clinicians, directly influencing clinical decision-making and treatment strategies. Despite their critical role, medical students may struggle with interpreting these reports, which can lead to miscommunication and potential diagnostic errors. This study investigated the impact of incorporating a clinical pathology course into the routine medical curriculum to enhance medical students' understanding of pathology reports and their satisfaction with the course.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study involved 92 medical students in their internship phase, who were divided into two groups: those who had completed the clinical pathology course and those who had not. The participants were provided with two pathology reports (covering malignant and benign gastrointestinal diseases) and a self-administered questionnaire consisting of 24 items. The data were analyzed via the chi-square test to assess significant differences between groups.

RESULTS

Medical interns who completed the course demonstrated significantly higher rates of moderate interpretation scores (80.43% vs. 63.04%) and lower rates of weak scores (6.53% vs. 32.61%) compared to those who did not participate (p = 0.001). Interns who passed the clinical pathology course had a significantly greater mean number of correct answers for interpreting malignant cases reports (p = 0.04), although no significant difference was found for benign cases reports (p = 0.93). Most interns who completed the course reported that it helped improve their interpretation skills, although some felt that the perceived benefits were limited. Additionally, the study identified key challenges students still faced when interpreting pathology reports including difficulties with pathology report terminology, understanding cancer staging abbreviations, and applying basic pathology concepts in clinical context.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that clinical pathology courses can improve medical students' understanding of pathology reports, particularly in cases of cancer, but improvements in course content and teaching methods are needed. This research offers valuable insights into improving medical education.

The rejection that defies antirejection drugs-chronic vascular rejection (allograft vasculopathy): The role of terminology and linguistic relativity

While allograft loss due to acute rejection has been dramatically reduced due to the introduction of immunophilins, this therapy has little effect on allografts lost due to chronic vascular rejection. This situation may be due to a misnomer of the pathology. Specifically, its designation as 'chronic rejection' has given the wrong impression that the cause of the disease has been identified. Analyzing this phenomenon under the rubric of linguistic relativity suggests that the words chosen to name the disease may have restricted our cognitive ability to solve the problem. Thus, we have to step out of the 'alloimmunity/rejection box'. Let's pause between our words, Speak and fall silent again, So that the meaning of the word just spoken, Sounds a clearer echo in our heads. Let's pause between our words. Andrey Makarevich.

Seeing the random forest through the decision trees. Supporting learning health systems from histopathology with machine learning models: Challenges and opportunities

This paper discusses some overlooked challenges faced when working with machine learning models for histopathology and presents a novel opportunity to support "Learning Health Systems" with them. Initially, the authors elaborate on these challenges after separating them according to their mitigation strategies: those that need innovative approaches, time, or future technological capabilities and those that require a conceptual reappraisal from a critical perspective. Then, a novel opportunity to support "Learning Health Systems" by integrating hidden information extracted by ML models from digitalized histopathology slides with other healthcare big data is presented.

Classifications of cutaneous lymphomas and lymphoproliferative disorders: An update from the EORTC cutaneous lymphoma histopathology group

The classification of primary cutaneous lymphomas and lymphoproliferative disorders (LPD) is continuously evolving by integrating novel clinical, pathological and molecular data. Recently two new classifications for haematological malignancies including entities of cutaneous lymphomas were proposed: the 5th edition of the WHO classification of haematolymphoid tumours and the International Consensus Classification (ICC) of mature lymphoid neoplasms. This article provides an overview of the changes introduced in these two classifications compared to the previous WHO classification. The main changes shared by both classifications include the downgrading of CD8+ acral T-cell lymphoma to CD8+ acral T-cell LPD, and the recognition of entities that were previously categorized as provisional and have now been designated as definite types including primary cutaneous small or medium CD4+ T-cell LPD, primary cutaneous gamma/delta T-cell lymphoma, primary cutaneous CD8+ aggressive epidermotropic cytotoxic T-cell lymphoma, Epstein-Barr virus-positive mucocutaneous ulcer. Both classifications consider primary cutaneous marginal zone B-cell clonal neoplasm as an indolent disease but use a different terminology: primary cutaneous marginal zone lymphoma (WHO) and primary cutaneous marginal zone LPD (ICC). The 5th WHO classification further introduces and provides essential and desirable diagnostic criteria for each disease type and includes chapters on reactive B- or T-cell rich lymphoid proliferations formerly referred as cutaneous pseudolymphomas, as well as histiocyte and CD8 T-cell rich LPD in patients with inborn error of immunity. As already emphasized in previous lymphoma classifications, the importance of integrating clinical, histological, phenotypic and molecular features remains the crucial conceptual base for defining cutaneous (and extracutaneous) lymphomas.

Understanding the use of evidence in the WHO Classification of Tumours: a protocol for an evidence gap map of the classification of tumours of the lung

INTRODUCTION

There are gaps in the evidence base of tumour classification despite being essential for cancer diagnosis, treatment and patient care. The WHO in charge of the production of an updated international classification, the WHO Classification of Tumours (WCT), aims to adapt evidence gap map (EGM) methodology to inform future editions of the WCT, by providing a visual summary of the existing evidence.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Bibliographical references used in the WCT fifth edition of Tumours of the Lung (Thoracic Tumours volume) will be used as search results of a literature search. A descriptive analysis of the cited evidence for tumour types and descriptors will be drafted and plotted in EPPI-Reviewer to develop a visual evidence map. The resulting EGM will reflect the number of cited studies in the size of the spheres, and the level of evidence by applying a four-colour code (red=low level evidence, orange=moderate level, green=high level and blue=unclassifiable). Overview of the findings will be provided in narrative form and a report will discuss the overall stage of cited research in the WCT and will include analysis of gaps, under-researched categories of tumour descriptors and pockets of low-level evidence.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethics approval will be required as this is a study of previously published material. Findings of the EGM will be published and used to guide editors, stakeholders and researchers for future research planning and related decision-making, especially for the development of future editions of the WCT.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022302327.

Diagnostic Value of MAML2 Rearrangements in Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma

Mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) is often seen in salivary glands and can harbor MAML2 translocations (MAML2+). The translocation status has diagnostic utility as an objective confirmation of the MEC diagnosis, for example, when distinction from the more aggressive adenosquamous carcinoma (ASC) is not straightforward. To assess the diagnostic relevance of MAML2, we examined our 5-year experience in prospective testing of 8106 solid tumors using RNA-seq panel testing in combinations with a two-round Delphi-based scenario survey. The prevalence of MAML2+ across all tumors was 0.28% (n = 23/8106) and the majority of MAML2+ cases were found in head and neck tumors (78.3%), where the overall prevalence was 5.9% (n = 18/307). The sensitivity of MAML2 for MEC was 60% and most cases (80%) were submitted for diagnostic confirmation; in 24% of cases, the MAML2 results changed the working diagnosis. An independent survey of 15 experts showed relative importance indexes of 0.8 and 0.65 for "confirmatory MAML2 testing" in suspected MEC and ASC, respectively. Real-world evidence confirmed that the added value of MAML2 is a composite of an imperfect confirmation test for MEC and a highly specific exclusion tool for the diagnosis of ASC. Real-world evidence can help move a rare molecular-genetic biomarker from an emerging tool to the clinic.

Examining the Landscape of Prognostic Factors and Clinical Outcomes for Cancer Control

Prognostic factors have important utility in various aspects of cancer surveillance, including research, patient care, and cancer control programmes. Nevertheless, there is heterogeneity in the collection of prognostic factors and outcomes data globally. This study aimed to investigate perspectives on the utility and application of prognostic factors and clinical outcomes in cancer control programmes. A qualitative phenomenology approach using expert interviews was taken to derive a rich description of the current state and future outlook of cancer prognostic factors and clinical outcomes. Individuals with expertise in this work and from various regions and institutions were invited to take part in one-on-one semi-structured interviews. Four areas related to infrastructure and funding challenges were identified by participants, including (1) data collection and access; (2) variability in data reporting, coding, and definitions; (3) limited coordination among databases; and (4) conceptualization and prioritization of meaningful prognostic factors and outcomes. Two areas were identified regarding important future priorities for cancer control: (1) global investment and intention in cancer surveillance and (2) data governance and exchange globally. Participants emphasized the need for better global collection of prognostic factors and clinical outcomes data and support for standardized data collection and data exchange practices by cancer registries.