TY - JOUR
T1 - Tools, techniques, and challenges in preparing cytology specimens for ancillary studies
T2 - results of the ASC Optimizing Cytology and Small Biopsy Specimen Processing for Ancillary Studies task force survey
AU - Heymann, Jonas J.
AU - Pineda, Cristiana M.
AU - Booth, Christine N.
AU - Jenkins, Elizabeth
AU - Menke, Joshua R.
AU - Monaco, Sara E.
AU - Nayar, Ritu
AU - Nishino, Michiya
AU - Roy-Chowdhuri, Sinchita
AU - Ruiz-Cordero, Roberto
AU - Russell, Donna K.
AU - Saqi, Anjali
AU - Sundling, Kaitlin E.
AU - Thrall, Michael J.
AU - Torous, Vanda F.
AU - VandenBussche, Christopher J.
AU - VanderLaan, Paul A.
AU - Zhang, M. Lisa
AU - Siddiqui, Momin T.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 American Society of Cytopathology
PY - 2025/1/1
Y1 - 2025/1/1
N2 - Introduction: Ancillary testing on cytopathology and other small biopsy specimens is crucial for diagnosis and provides critical information to clinicians. Testing is dependent on preanalytic factors and would benefit from standardization of specimen collection protocols across laboratories. To assess institutional practices and areas of need for evidence-based standards, we surveyed current practices across cytopathology laboratories. Materials and methods: A twelve-question electronic survey was distributed to American Society of Cytopathology (ASC) members through email, social media, and the ASC from January 8, 2024 to March 1, 2024. Survey responses were tabulated. Results: Of 294 respondents, 257 (87%) completed at least 10/12 questions. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded cell blocks (CBs) are utilized for immunohistochemistry, molecular testing, and in situ hybridization by 89%, 84%, and 71% of respondents, respectively. For fine needle aspirations, no collection medium is utilized by a majority of respondents. In contrast, 61% utilize no collection medium for fluids; 64% predominantly utilize liquid-based preservatives for other exfoliative specimens. For CB preparation, 58% of respondents use coagulating agent; 67% use no fixative before formalin. The two most significant factors limiting clinical utility of ancillary testing in cytology specimens are low cellularity and lack of validation (49% and 23% of respondents, respectively). Conclusions: There is wide variation in current practices among laboratories, reflecting lack of consensus. Although laboratories utilize different collection media for different specimen types, for CB utilization, current survey results are similar to those reported previously. ASC has convened a task force to facilitate specimen standardization and minimize variability among preanalytic factors.
AB - Introduction: Ancillary testing on cytopathology and other small biopsy specimens is crucial for diagnosis and provides critical information to clinicians. Testing is dependent on preanalytic factors and would benefit from standardization of specimen collection protocols across laboratories. To assess institutional practices and areas of need for evidence-based standards, we surveyed current practices across cytopathology laboratories. Materials and methods: A twelve-question electronic survey was distributed to American Society of Cytopathology (ASC) members through email, social media, and the ASC from January 8, 2024 to March 1, 2024. Survey responses were tabulated. Results: Of 294 respondents, 257 (87%) completed at least 10/12 questions. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded cell blocks (CBs) are utilized for immunohistochemistry, molecular testing, and in situ hybridization by 89%, 84%, and 71% of respondents, respectively. For fine needle aspirations, no collection medium is utilized by a majority of respondents. In contrast, 61% utilize no collection medium for fluids; 64% predominantly utilize liquid-based preservatives for other exfoliative specimens. For CB preparation, 58% of respondents use coagulating agent; 67% use no fixative before formalin. The two most significant factors limiting clinical utility of ancillary testing in cytology specimens are low cellularity and lack of validation (49% and 23% of respondents, respectively). Conclusions: There is wide variation in current practices among laboratories, reflecting lack of consensus. Although laboratories utilize different collection media for different specimen types, for CB utilization, current survey results are similar to those reported previously. ASC has convened a task force to facilitate specimen standardization and minimize variability among preanalytic factors.
KW - Ancillary studies
KW - Cell block
KW - Fixation
KW - Immunohistochemistry
KW - Molecular diagnostic techniques
KW - Preanalytic factors
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85209231512&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85209231512&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jasc.2024.10.001
DO - 10.1016/j.jasc.2024.10.001
M3 - Article
C2 - 39547835
AN - SCOPUS:85209231512
SN - 2213-2945
VL - 14
SP - 55
EP - 63
JO - Journal of the American Society of Cytopathology
JF - Journal of the American Society of Cytopathology
IS - 1
ER -