GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 37, No. 15_suppl ( 2019-05-20), p. 11020-11020
    Abstract: 11020 Background: With more than 80 different histologic subtypes, sarcomas are a unique pathologic challenge. As therapeutic decisions have become histology-specific, obtaining an accurate pathologic diagnosis is critical in guiding treatment decisions. The aim of this study is to determine the discordance between the diagnosis rendered by an external non-specialized pathologist and pathologic re-review by a specialized sarcoma pathologist at a high-volume sarcoma center. Methods: Patients who presented at the UCLA Multidisciplinary Sarcoma Conference (MSC) in 2017 that had a pathologic diagnosis from an outside facility were included in this study. All specimens underwent pathologic re-review at UCLA by an experienced sarcoma pathologist. The pathology was classified as concordant (identical diagnoses), minor discordance (difference with minor impact on prognosis/therapy) and major discordance (difference with significant impact on prognosis/therapy). Results: 1350 patients were presented at the UCLA MSC in 2017. Of the 635 new patients, 196 presented with an outside pathologic diagnosis and underwent pathologic re-review at UCLA. 44% (n = 87) were concordant, 22% (n = 43) had minor discordance, and 34% (n = 66) had major discordance. Major discordance included substantial discrepancies in histologic subtype (n = 24, 36%), benign/malignant mismatch (n = 23, 35%), diagnostic from non-diagnostic (n = 12, 18%) and major grading discrepancy (n = 7, 11%). Major discordance was most often seen in biopsies [needle (n = 27, 32%), incisional (n = 30, 44%)] as compared to resection (n = 9, 21%). Conclusions: 56% of external non-specialized sarcoma pathologic diagnoses were discordant from specialized sarcoma pathologist review, 34% of which were major discordances. Pathologic re-review of a presumed sarcoma by a specialized sarcoma pathologist is critical for both patient care and investigational studies. [Table: see text]
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2019
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...