Dataset Information

Superficial basal cell carcinoma, think deeper: Step sectioning of skin biopsy specimens yields 14% more aggressive subtypes.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Because of different therapeutic regimens for superficial and non-superficial basal cell carcinomas (BCCs), accurate histopathological examination of a punch biopsy to determine its subtype is essential. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the additional yield of a more extensive step-section method to that of a standard histologic examination at 4 levels.

Material and methods

Data for this prospective study was obtained from the Pathology department of a Dutch tertiary hospital. Biopsy specimens of subsequent patients from March 2019 to June 2020 were sectioned to 8-levels instead of the regular 4-levels. Only patients with a superficial BCC subtype in the first 4-levels of sectioning were included (n = 100). After 8-level sectioning, it was recorded in which level (5-8) a more aggressive BCC component was found (i.e. nodular, infiltrative, or micronodular). Patients were followed-up to evaluate further treatment, and in case of excision, the excision specimen was reviewed to determine the BCC subtype. A logistic regression was performed to assess characteristics associated with a more aggressive BCC component in levels 5-8.

Results

In 14 patients (14%) a more aggressive component was found in levels 5-8, all with a nodular component. Thirteen of these patients underwent excision, confirming a more aggressive BCC subtype. Of the 86 patients that had no deeper BCC component in levels 5-8, 26 (30.2%) underwent excision; In 4 patients no residual BCC was found, in 15 patients superficial BCC, and in 7 a more aggressive BCC subtype (1 nodular and 6 a combination of superficial/nodular/infiltrative). In multivariable analysis, head&neck localization was associated with finding a more aggressive BCC subtype in levels 5-8 (OR 6.41 (95%CI 1.56-26.30), p = 0.01)).

Conclusions

More extensive sectioning of superficial BCC biopsy specimens, especially in the head&neck area, leads to a more accurate BCC subtype diagnosis requiring different clinical management strategies.

SUBMITTER: El Sharouni MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8775292 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Brain biopsies of superficial cortex are performed for diagnosis of neurological diseases, but preoperative predictors of successful diagnosis and risks are lacking.We evaluated effectiveness and outcomes of superficial cortical biopsies and determined preoperative predictors of diagnosis, outcomes, morbidities, and mortality.A single-institution retrospective analysis of 170 patients who underwent open brain biopsies of superficial cortex was performed. Clinical predictors of effectiveness and outcomes were determined using univariate/multivariate analyses and a system for risk-benefit stratification was created and tested.Brain biopsies led to successful diagnosis in 122 of 170 (71.8%) and affected management in 97 of 170 (57.1%) cases. Factors increasing the odds of diagnostic pathology included age older than 45 years (odds ratio [OR]: 2.67, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.34-5.27, P < .01), previous cancer diagnosis (OR: 3.64, 95% CI: 1.69-7.85, P < .001), focal (OR: 3.90, 95% CI: 1.91-8.00, P < .001) and enhancing (OR: 5.03, 95% CI: 2.41-10.52, P < .001) lesions on magnetic resonance imaging, biopsy of specific lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (OR: 9.34, 95% CI: 4.29-20.33, P < .001), and use of intraoperative navigation (OR: 6.59, 95% CI: 3.04-14.28, P < .001). Brain biopsies led to symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, seizures, other significant morbidities, and perioperative mortality in 12.4%, 16.2%, 37.1%, and 8% of cases, respectively. Risk of postoperative intracranial hemorrhage was increased by a history of aspirin use (OR: 2.51, 95% CI: 1.23-5.28, P < .05) and age older than 60 years (OR: 2.66, 95% CI: 1.36-5.18, P < .01).Effectiveness and risk of morbidity/mortality can be estimated preoperatively for patients undergoing open brain biopsies of the superficial cortex. Older age and specific imaging characteristics increase the odds of diagnostic biopsy. Conversely, older age and aspirin use increases the risk of postoperative complications.

Project description:ImportanceA breast pathology diagnosis provides the basis for clinical treatment and management decisions; however, its accuracy is inadequately understood.ObjectivesTo quantify the magnitude of diagnostic disagreement among pathologists compared with a consensus panel reference diagnosis and to evaluate associated patient and pathologist characteristics.Design, setting, and participantsStudy of pathologists who interpret breast biopsies in clinical practices in 8 US states.ExposuresParticipants independently interpreted slides between November 2011 and May 2014 from test sets of 60 breast biopsies (240 total cases, 1 slide per case), including 23 cases of invasive breast cancer, 73 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 72 with atypical hyperplasia (atypia), and 72 benign cases without atypia. Participants were blinded to the interpretations of other study pathologists and consensus panel members. Among the 3 consensus panel members, unanimous agreement of their independent diagnoses was 75%, and concordance with the consensus-derived reference diagnoses was 90.3%.Main outcomes and measuresThe proportions of diagnoses overinterpreted and underinterpreted relative to the consensus-derived reference diagnoses were assessed.ResultsSixty-five percent of invited, responding pathologists were eligible and consented to participate. Of these, 91% (N = 115) completed the study, providing 6900 individual case diagnoses. Compared with the consensus-derived reference diagnosis, the overall concordance rate of diagnostic interpretations of participating pathologists was 75.3% (95% CI, 73.4%-77.0%; 5194 of 6900 interpretations). Among invasive carcinoma cases (663 interpretations), 96% (95% CI, 94%-97%) were concordant, and 4% (95% CI, 3%-6%) were underinterpreted; among DCIS cases (2097 interpretations), 84% (95% CI, 82%-86%) were concordant, 3% (95% CI, 2%-4%) were overinterpreted, and 13% (95% CI, 12%-15%) were underinterpreted; among atypia cases (2070 interpretations), 48% (95% CI, 44%-52%) were concordant, 17% (95% CI, 15%-21%) were overinterpreted, and 35% (95% CI, 31%-39%) were underinterpreted; and among benign cases without atypia (2070 interpretations), 87% (95% CI, 85%-89%) were concordant and 13% (95% CI, 11%-15%) were overinterpreted. Disagreement with the reference diagnosis was statistically significantly higher among biopsies from women with higher (n = 122) vs lower (n = 118) breast density on prior mammograms (overall concordance rate, 73% [95% CI, 71%-75%] for higher vs 77% [95% CI, 75%-80%] for lower, P < .001), and among pathologists who interpreted lower weekly case volumes (P < .001) or worked in smaller practices (P = .034) or nonacademic settings (P = .007).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study of pathologists, in which diagnostic interpretation was based on a single breast biopsy slide, overall agreement between the individual pathologists' interpretations and the expert consensus-derived reference diagnoses was 75.3%, with the highest level of concordance for invasive carcinoma and lower levels of concordance for DCIS and atypia. Further research is needed to understand the relationship of these findings with patient management.