Clinical significance of performing immunohistochemistry on cases with a previous diagnosis of Cancer coming to a National Comprehensive Cancer Center for treatment or second opinion

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is an important adjunctive test in diagnostic surgical pathology. We studied the clinical significance and outcomes in performing IHC on cases with a previous diagnosis of cancer who are coming to the Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC), a National Cancer Institute designated N...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The American journal of surgical pathology 2002-09, Vol.26 (9), p.1222-1230
Hauptverfasser: WETHERINGTON, R. Wesley, COOPER, Harry S, AL-SALEEM, Tahseen, ACKERMAN, Debbie S, ADAMS-MCDONNELL, Rose, DAVIS, Wendy, EHYA, Hormoz, PATCHEFSKY, Arthur S, SUDER, Joanne, YOUNG, Nancy A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1230
container_issue 9
container_start_page 1222
container_title The American journal of surgical pathology
container_volume 26
creator WETHERINGTON, R. Wesley
COOPER, Harry S
AL-SALEEM, Tahseen
ACKERMAN, Debbie S
ADAMS-MCDONNELL, Rose
DAVIS, Wendy
EHYA, Hormoz
PATCHEFSKY, Arthur S
SUDER, Joanne
YOUNG, Nancy A
description Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is an important adjunctive test in diagnostic surgical pathology. We studied the clinical significance and outcomes in performing IHC on cases with a previous diagnosis of cancer who are coming to the Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC), a National Cancer Institute designated National Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCCC), for treatment and/or second opinion. We reviewed all the outside surgical pathology slide review cases seen at the FCCC for 1998 and 1999 in which IHC was performed. Cases were divided into the following: confirmation of outside diagnoses without and with prior IHC performed by the outside institution (groups A and B, respectively) and cases with a significant change in diagnosis without and with prior IHC performed by the outside institution (groups C and D, respectively). During 1998 and 1999, 6678 slide review cases were reviewed at the FCCC with an overall significant change in diagnosis in 213 cases (3.2%). IHC was performed on 186 of 6678 (2.7%) slide review cases with confirmation of the outside diagnosis in 152 (81.7%) cases and a significant change in diagnosis in 34 (18.3%) cases. Patient follow-up was obtained in 32 of 34 (94.1%) cases with a significant change in diagnosis (groups C and D), which confirmed the correctness of our diagnosis in 26 of 27 cases (96%; in five cases follow-up was inconclusive). We repeated the identical antibodies performed by the outside institutions in group D (37 antibodies) and group B (133 antibodies) with different results in 48.6% and 13.5%, respectively (overall nonconcordance 21.2%). In group D additional antibody tests beyond that performed by the outside institution were needed in 88.8% of cases to make a change of diagnosis. In the setting of a NCCC, reperforming and/or performing IHC on cases with a previous diagnosis of cancer is not a duplication of effort or misuse of resources. Repeating and/or performing IHC in this setting is important in the care and management of patients with cancer.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/00000478-200209000-00013
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72072325</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>72072325</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c343t-cec4e83c869b81490439b9a2cdc893e5e116cf9612e1523ff0ba1f9a979d00a83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkdtu1DAQhi0EotvCKyDfwF3Ah2RjX6KIk1TBDVxHXme8a5TYweMt6ovxfMy229aSNR7rm388_hnjUryXwvYfxGm1vWmUEEpYShraUj9jG9lp1RBjn7ONkG3fdNJ0F-wS8TcRykj1kl1Ipei2txv2b5hjit7NHOM-xUDH5IHnwFcoIZclpj2Py3JM-RCxZn-AhWK55Tlx7xCQ_431wB1fC9zEfEQ-RbdPGSOeVIaTXOE-3wnVTOB3V2NO1HHICxUdIGG8gQdygFQpUGteC7i6UM4pQfA5TTyv9NycXrEXwc0Ir8_xiv36_Onn8LW5_vHl2_DxuvG61bXx4Fsw2put3RnZWtFqu7NO-ckbq6EDKbc-2K1UIDulQxA7J4N19H2TEM7oK_buXnct-c8RsI40vYd5dglo1rFXoldadQSae9CXjFggjGuJiyu3oxTjybPxwbPx0bPxzjMqfXPucdwtMD0Vnk0i4O0ZcEhOhUI_FfGJ08YYrZT-D6hoo3A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>72072325</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Clinical significance of performing immunohistochemistry on cases with a previous diagnosis of Cancer coming to a National Comprehensive Cancer Center for treatment or second opinion</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>WETHERINGTON, R. Wesley ; COOPER, Harry S ; AL-SALEEM, Tahseen ; ACKERMAN, Debbie S ; ADAMS-MCDONNELL, Rose ; DAVIS, Wendy ; EHYA, Hormoz ; PATCHEFSKY, Arthur S ; SUDER, Joanne ; YOUNG, Nancy A</creator><creatorcontrib>WETHERINGTON, R. Wesley ; COOPER, Harry S ; AL-SALEEM, Tahseen ; ACKERMAN, Debbie S ; ADAMS-MCDONNELL, Rose ; DAVIS, Wendy ; EHYA, Hormoz ; PATCHEFSKY, Arthur S ; SUDER, Joanne ; YOUNG, Nancy A</creatorcontrib><description>Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is an important adjunctive test in diagnostic surgical pathology. We studied the clinical significance and outcomes in performing IHC on cases with a previous diagnosis of cancer who are coming to the Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC), a National Cancer Institute designated National Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCCC), for treatment and/or second opinion. We reviewed all the outside surgical pathology slide review cases seen at the FCCC for 1998 and 1999 in which IHC was performed. Cases were divided into the following: confirmation of outside diagnoses without and with prior IHC performed by the outside institution (groups A and B, respectively) and cases with a significant change in diagnosis without and with prior IHC performed by the outside institution (groups C and D, respectively). During 1998 and 1999, 6678 slide review cases were reviewed at the FCCC with an overall significant change in diagnosis in 213 cases (3.2%). IHC was performed on 186 of 6678 (2.7%) slide review cases with confirmation of the outside diagnosis in 152 (81.7%) cases and a significant change in diagnosis in 34 (18.3%) cases. Patient follow-up was obtained in 32 of 34 (94.1%) cases with a significant change in diagnosis (groups C and D), which confirmed the correctness of our diagnosis in 26 of 27 cases (96%; in five cases follow-up was inconclusive). We repeated the identical antibodies performed by the outside institutions in group D (37 antibodies) and group B (133 antibodies) with different results in 48.6% and 13.5%, respectively (overall nonconcordance 21.2%). In group D additional antibody tests beyond that performed by the outside institution were needed in 88.8% of cases to make a change of diagnosis. In the setting of a NCCC, reperforming and/or performing IHC on cases with a previous diagnosis of cancer is not a duplication of effort or misuse of resources. Repeating and/or performing IHC in this setting is important in the care and management of patients with cancer.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0147-5185</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-0979</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/00000478-200209000-00013</identifier><identifier>PMID: 12218579</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AJSPDX</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hagerstown, MD: Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Biomarkers, Tumor - analysis ; Comprehensive Health Care ; Diagnostic Errors ; Health Resources ; Immunohistochemistry - methods ; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) ; Medical sciences ; Miscellaneous. Technology ; Neoplasms - chemistry ; Neoplasms - pathology ; Neoplasms - therapy ; Pathology, Clinical - methods ; Pathology, Clinical - standards ; Pathology. Cytology. Biochemistry. Spectrometry. Miscellaneous investigative techniques ; Peer Review, Health Care ; Quality Assurance, Health Care ; Referral and Consultation ; Retrospective Studies</subject><ispartof>The American journal of surgical pathology, 2002-09, Vol.26 (9), p.1222-1230</ispartof><rights>2002 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c343t-cec4e83c869b81490439b9a2cdc893e5e116cf9612e1523ff0ba1f9a979d00a83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c343t-cec4e83c869b81490439b9a2cdc893e5e116cf9612e1523ff0ba1f9a979d00a83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=13888322$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12218579$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>WETHERINGTON, R. Wesley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>COOPER, Harry S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AL-SALEEM, Tahseen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ACKERMAN, Debbie S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ADAMS-MCDONNELL, Rose</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DAVIS, Wendy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>EHYA, Hormoz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PATCHEFSKY, Arthur S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SUDER, Joanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>YOUNG, Nancy A</creatorcontrib><title>Clinical significance of performing immunohistochemistry on cases with a previous diagnosis of Cancer coming to a National Comprehensive Cancer Center for treatment or second opinion</title><title>The American journal of surgical pathology</title><addtitle>Am J Surg Pathol</addtitle><description>Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is an important adjunctive test in diagnostic surgical pathology. We studied the clinical significance and outcomes in performing IHC on cases with a previous diagnosis of cancer who are coming to the Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC), a National Cancer Institute designated National Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCCC), for treatment and/or second opinion. We reviewed all the outside surgical pathology slide review cases seen at the FCCC for 1998 and 1999 in which IHC was performed. Cases were divided into the following: confirmation of outside diagnoses without and with prior IHC performed by the outside institution (groups A and B, respectively) and cases with a significant change in diagnosis without and with prior IHC performed by the outside institution (groups C and D, respectively). During 1998 and 1999, 6678 slide review cases were reviewed at the FCCC with an overall significant change in diagnosis in 213 cases (3.2%). IHC was performed on 186 of 6678 (2.7%) slide review cases with confirmation of the outside diagnosis in 152 (81.7%) cases and a significant change in diagnosis in 34 (18.3%) cases. Patient follow-up was obtained in 32 of 34 (94.1%) cases with a significant change in diagnosis (groups C and D), which confirmed the correctness of our diagnosis in 26 of 27 cases (96%; in five cases follow-up was inconclusive). We repeated the identical antibodies performed by the outside institutions in group D (37 antibodies) and group B (133 antibodies) with different results in 48.6% and 13.5%, respectively (overall nonconcordance 21.2%). In group D additional antibody tests beyond that performed by the outside institution were needed in 88.8% of cases to make a change of diagnosis. In the setting of a NCCC, reperforming and/or performing IHC on cases with a previous diagnosis of cancer is not a duplication of effort or misuse of resources. Repeating and/or performing IHC in this setting is important in the care and management of patients with cancer.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biomarkers, Tumor - analysis</subject><subject>Comprehensive Health Care</subject><subject>Diagnostic Errors</subject><subject>Health Resources</subject><subject>Immunohistochemistry - methods</subject><subject>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Miscellaneous. Technology</subject><subject>Neoplasms - chemistry</subject><subject>Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Neoplasms - therapy</subject><subject>Pathology, Clinical - methods</subject><subject>Pathology, Clinical - standards</subject><subject>Pathology. Cytology. Biochemistry. Spectrometry. Miscellaneous investigative techniques</subject><subject>Peer Review, Health Care</subject><subject>Quality Assurance, Health Care</subject><subject>Referral and Consultation</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><issn>0147-5185</issn><issn>1532-0979</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkdtu1DAQhi0EotvCKyDfwF3Ah2RjX6KIk1TBDVxHXme8a5TYweMt6ovxfMy229aSNR7rm388_hnjUryXwvYfxGm1vWmUEEpYShraUj9jG9lp1RBjn7ONkG3fdNJ0F-wS8TcRykj1kl1Ipei2txv2b5hjit7NHOM-xUDH5IHnwFcoIZclpj2Py3JM-RCxZn-AhWK55Tlx7xCQ_431wB1fC9zEfEQ-RbdPGSOeVIaTXOE-3wnVTOB3V2NO1HHICxUdIGG8gQdygFQpUGteC7i6UM4pQfA5TTyv9NycXrEXwc0Ir8_xiv36_Onn8LW5_vHl2_DxuvG61bXx4Fsw2put3RnZWtFqu7NO-ckbq6EDKbc-2K1UIDulQxA7J4N19H2TEM7oK_buXnct-c8RsI40vYd5dglo1rFXoldadQSae9CXjFggjGuJiyu3oxTjybPxwbPx0bPxzjMqfXPucdwtMD0Vnk0i4O0ZcEhOhUI_FfGJ08YYrZT-D6hoo3A</recordid><startdate>20020901</startdate><enddate>20020901</enddate><creator>WETHERINGTON, R. Wesley</creator><creator>COOPER, Harry S</creator><creator>AL-SALEEM, Tahseen</creator><creator>ACKERMAN, Debbie S</creator><creator>ADAMS-MCDONNELL, Rose</creator><creator>DAVIS, Wendy</creator><creator>EHYA, Hormoz</creator><creator>PATCHEFSKY, Arthur S</creator><creator>SUDER, Joanne</creator><creator>YOUNG, Nancy A</creator><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20020901</creationdate><title>Clinical significance of performing immunohistochemistry on cases with a previous diagnosis of Cancer coming to a National Comprehensive Cancer Center for treatment or second opinion</title><author>WETHERINGTON, R. Wesley ; COOPER, Harry S ; AL-SALEEM, Tahseen ; ACKERMAN, Debbie S ; ADAMS-MCDONNELL, Rose ; DAVIS, Wendy ; EHYA, Hormoz ; PATCHEFSKY, Arthur S ; SUDER, Joanne ; YOUNG, Nancy A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c343t-cec4e83c869b81490439b9a2cdc893e5e116cf9612e1523ff0ba1f9a979d00a83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biomarkers, Tumor - analysis</topic><topic>Comprehensive Health Care</topic><topic>Diagnostic Errors</topic><topic>Health Resources</topic><topic>Immunohistochemistry - methods</topic><topic>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Miscellaneous. Technology</topic><topic>Neoplasms - chemistry</topic><topic>Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Neoplasms - therapy</topic><topic>Pathology, Clinical - methods</topic><topic>Pathology, Clinical - standards</topic><topic>Pathology. Cytology. Biochemistry. Spectrometry. Miscellaneous investigative techniques</topic><topic>Peer Review, Health Care</topic><topic>Quality Assurance, Health Care</topic><topic>Referral and Consultation</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>WETHERINGTON, R. Wesley</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>COOPER, Harry S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AL-SALEEM, Tahseen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ACKERMAN, Debbie S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ADAMS-MCDONNELL, Rose</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DAVIS, Wendy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>EHYA, Hormoz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PATCHEFSKY, Arthur S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SUDER, Joanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>YOUNG, Nancy A</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The American journal of surgical pathology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>WETHERINGTON, R. Wesley</au><au>COOPER, Harry S</au><au>AL-SALEEM, Tahseen</au><au>ACKERMAN, Debbie S</au><au>ADAMS-MCDONNELL, Rose</au><au>DAVIS, Wendy</au><au>EHYA, Hormoz</au><au>PATCHEFSKY, Arthur S</au><au>SUDER, Joanne</au><au>YOUNG, Nancy A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Clinical significance of performing immunohistochemistry on cases with a previous diagnosis of Cancer coming to a National Comprehensive Cancer Center for treatment or second opinion</atitle><jtitle>The American journal of surgical pathology</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Surg Pathol</addtitle><date>2002-09-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1222</spage><epage>1230</epage><pages>1222-1230</pages><issn>0147-5185</issn><eissn>1532-0979</eissn><coden>AJSPDX</coden><abstract>Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is an important adjunctive test in diagnostic surgical pathology. We studied the clinical significance and outcomes in performing IHC on cases with a previous diagnosis of cancer who are coming to the Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC), a National Cancer Institute designated National Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCCC), for treatment and/or second opinion. We reviewed all the outside surgical pathology slide review cases seen at the FCCC for 1998 and 1999 in which IHC was performed. Cases were divided into the following: confirmation of outside diagnoses without and with prior IHC performed by the outside institution (groups A and B, respectively) and cases with a significant change in diagnosis without and with prior IHC performed by the outside institution (groups C and D, respectively). During 1998 and 1999, 6678 slide review cases were reviewed at the FCCC with an overall significant change in diagnosis in 213 cases (3.2%). IHC was performed on 186 of 6678 (2.7%) slide review cases with confirmation of the outside diagnosis in 152 (81.7%) cases and a significant change in diagnosis in 34 (18.3%) cases. Patient follow-up was obtained in 32 of 34 (94.1%) cases with a significant change in diagnosis (groups C and D), which confirmed the correctness of our diagnosis in 26 of 27 cases (96%; in five cases follow-up was inconclusive). We repeated the identical antibodies performed by the outside institutions in group D (37 antibodies) and group B (133 antibodies) with different results in 48.6% and 13.5%, respectively (overall nonconcordance 21.2%). In group D additional antibody tests beyond that performed by the outside institution were needed in 88.8% of cases to make a change of diagnosis. In the setting of a NCCC, reperforming and/or performing IHC on cases with a previous diagnosis of cancer is not a duplication of effort or misuse of resources. Repeating and/or performing IHC in this setting is important in the care and management of patients with cancer.</abstract><cop>Hagerstown, MD</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</pub><pmid>12218579</pmid><doi>10.1097/00000478-200209000-00013</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0147-5185
ispartof The American journal of surgical pathology, 2002-09, Vol.26 (9), p.1222-1230
issn 0147-5185
1532-0979
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72072325
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete
subjects Biological and medical sciences
Biomarkers, Tumor - analysis
Comprehensive Health Care
Diagnostic Errors
Health Resources
Immunohistochemistry - methods
Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)
Medical sciences
Miscellaneous. Technology
Neoplasms - chemistry
Neoplasms - pathology
Neoplasms - therapy
Pathology, Clinical - methods
Pathology, Clinical - standards
Pathology. Cytology. Biochemistry. Spectrometry. Miscellaneous investigative techniques
Peer Review, Health Care
Quality Assurance, Health Care
Referral and Consultation
Retrospective Studies
title Clinical significance of performing immunohistochemistry on cases with a previous diagnosis of Cancer coming to a National Comprehensive Cancer Center for treatment or second opinion
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T08%3A23%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Clinical%20significance%20of%20performing%20immunohistochemistry%20on%20cases%20with%20a%20previous%20diagnosis%20of%20Cancer%20coming%20to%20a%20National%20Comprehensive%20Cancer%20Center%20for%20treatment%20or%20second%20opinion&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20journal%20of%20surgical%20pathology&rft.au=WETHERINGTON,%20R.%20Wesley&rft.date=2002-09-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1222&rft.epage=1230&rft.pages=1222-1230&rft.issn=0147-5185&rft.eissn=1532-0979&rft.coden=AJSPDX&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/00000478-200209000-00013&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E72072325%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=72072325&rft_id=info:pmid/12218579&rfr_iscdi=true