SOFT TISSUE/ - - - - - - SARCOMA Arbiser 2001 Retrospective review of 500 Soft tissue lesions. Initial diagnosis EEO provided by a Soft Initial Nature of initial pathology opinion consecutive cases referred Sample obtained or no diagnosis Tissue Consultation Service, diagnosis (no diagnosis, provisional to a soft tissue consultation by biopsy or rendered “which serves as an diagnosis) practice for EEO in a definitive excisions excellent resource to Diagnostic accuracy (concordance; month period in 1998. (92.4%), or needle evaluate situations in which major and minor disagreements) or punch biopsy pathologists themselves United States Specimen diagnostic category (7.6%) recognise their limitations and/or seek guidance”. EEO N=500 cases was ‘self-referred’ from across the US. Additional IHC conducted as required. Ray-Coquard Prospective review of 1463 Soft tissue or Initial diagnosis EEO provided by an expert Initial Patient characteristics 2012 cases of soft tissue or visceral sarcoma pathologist. In rare cases, diagnosis Type of referring laboratory visceral sarcoma reviewed the reviewing expert N=1463 casesc (public/private) by expert pathologists requested that the diagnosis Characteristics of submitted between 2005 and 2008. was re-examined by another tumours (tumour site, histological The study included cases expert or discussed at panel subtype, grade, type of sample) referred for expert SO at the meetings and a final Diagnostic accuracy (full/partial request of the initial consensus was reached. All concordance, complete pathologist and also pathologist from the three discordance) cases in which the initial regions involved in this Nature of discordance (grade, ‘non-expert’ pathologist did ‘central review’ attended histological type, subtype) not request confirmation of training sessions in order to diagnosis and whose homogenise the review findings were reviewed in process. the context of the study. France
SOFT TISSUE/ SARCOMA - - - - - - Arbiser 2001 Retrospective review of 500 consecutive cases referred to a soft tissue consultation practice for EEO in a period in 1998. United States Soft tissue lesions. Sample obtained by biopsy or definitive excisions (92.4%), or needle or punch biopsy (7.6%) N=500 cases Initial diagnosis or no diagnosis rendered EEO provided by a Soft Tissue Consultation Service, “which serves as an excellent resource to evaluate situations in which pathologists themselves recognise their limitations and/or seek guidance”. EEO was ‘self-referred’ from across the US. Additional IHC conducted as required. Initial diagnosis Nature of initial pathology opinion (no diagnosis, provisional diagnosis) Diagnostic accuracy (concordance; major and minor disagreements) Specimen diagnostic category Ray-Coquard 2012 Prospective review of 1463 cases of soft tissue or visceral sarcoma reviewed by expert pathologists between 2005 and 2008. The study included cases referred for expert SO at the request of the initial pathologist and also cases in which the initial ‘non-expert’ pathologist did not request confirmation of diagnosis and whose findings were reviewed in the context of the study. France Soft tissue or visceral sarcoma N=1463 casesc Initial diagnosis EEO provided by an expert pathologist. In rare cases, the reviewing expert requested that the diagnosis was re-examined by another expert or discussed at panel meetings and a final consensus was reached. All pathologist from the three regions involved in this ‘central review’ attended training sessions in order to homogenise the review process. Initial diagnosis Patient characteristics Type of referring laboratory (public/private) Characteristics of submitted tumours (tumour site, histological subtype, grade, type of sample) Diagnostic accuracy (full/partial concordance, complete discordance) Nature of discordance (grade, histological type, subtype) month
1332%20-%20FinalAssessmentReport%20-accessible.docx