Sandra E. Brooks

Artifact in Cervical Lletz Specimens: Correlation with Follow-up

The effect of cautery artifact on the ability to accurately diagnose dysplasia and predict abnormal follow-up in large loop excision specimens of the transformation zone (LLETZ) has not been adequately addressed in the pathology literature. One hundred consecutive conization specimens with cytologic and/or histologic follow-up were studied. Indications for the procedure were high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (on Pap smear and/or biopsy) in 64 cases, low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion in 28, atypical squamous cells of unknown significance (ASCUS) in 3, atypical glandular cells of unknown significance in 2, adenocarcinoma in situ, squamous carcinoma in situ, and invasive squamous carcinoma in 1 each. Twenty-four specimens were cold-knife conizations (CKCs) and 76 LLETZs. All LLETZs had at least 1+ artifact, and in 46 cases (61%) it interfered with at least one aspect of evaluation. In 21 cases (28%), 1+ artifact interfered only with margin assessment. In 25 cases (33%), there was 2+ or 3+ artifact precluding not only margin assessment, but also diagnosis and grading of dysplasia. Of the 43 LLETZs received in more than one piece, 33 (77%) had interfering artifact, and in 21 (49%) it was 2+ or 3+, at least focally interfering with diagnosis and grading. In contrast, of 33 LLETZs received in a single piece, only 13 (39%) had interfering artifact, which was 2+ or 3+ in 4 (12%), (p < 0.05). Positive follow-up (including ASCUS, favor dysplasia, and ASCUS, not otherwise specified) was found in 6 of 7 CKCs with positive margins (86%), 10 of 16 LLETZs with positive margins (63%), and 4 of 7 LLETZs with unassessable margins (57%). In cases with negative cone margins, positive follow-up was found in 2 of 17 CKCs (12%), and 18 of 53 LLETZs (34%), p < 0.05; a higher frequency of interfering artifact (p < 0.05) was seen in these cases. LLETZ margin status and postprocedure endocervical curettage (ECC) specimens were not good predictors of residual disease, unlike margin status in CKC. Post-CKC ECC was a better predictor of subsequent abnormal follow-up than post-LLETZ ECC (p < 0.05). The presence of interfering artifact was only rarely mentioned in the original pathology report. In conclusion, the status of margins is a better predictor of abnormal follow-up in CKC than in LLETZ specimens. Fragmentation of the specimen is an additional factor, compounding the inevitable artifact. Postprocedure ECC is not a useful indicator of residual dysplasia. The pathologist should not hesitate to comment on specimen adequacy in surgical pathology reports.

Maryland's special populations network : A model for cancer disparities research, education, and training

The unequal burden of cancer in minority and underserved communities nationally and in Maryland is a compelling crisis. The Maryland Special Populations Cancer Research Network (MSPN) developed an infrastructure covering Marylands 23 jurisdictions and Baltimore City through formal partnerships between the University of Maryland School of Medicine, University of Maryland Statewide Health Network, University of Maryland Eastern Shore, and community partners in Baltimore City, rural Eastern Shore, rural Western Maryland, rural Southern Maryland, and Piscataway Conoy Tribe and statewide American Indians. Guided by the community‐based participatory framework, the MSPN undertook a comprehensive assessment (of needs, strengths, and resources available) that laid the foundation for programmatic efforts in community‐initiated cancer awareness and education, research, and training. The MSPN infrastructure was used to implement successful and innovative community‐based cancer education interventions and technological solutions; conduct education and promotion of clinical trials, cancer health disparities research, and minority faculty cancer research career development; and leverage additional resources for sustainability. MSPN engaged in informed advocacy among decision‐ and policymakers at state and national levels, and its community‐based clinical trials program was recognized by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as a Best Practice Award. The solutions to reduce and eliminate cancer health disparities are complex and require comprehensive and focused multidisciplinary cancer health disparities research, training, and education strategies implemented through robust community–academic partnerships. Cancer 2006.

Maryland's Special Populations Cancer Network: Cancer Health Disparities Reduction Model

Cancer in Maryland is a serious health concern for minority and underserved populations in rural and urban areas. This report describes the National Cancer Institute (NCI) supported Maryland Special Populations Cancer Network (MSPN), a community–academic partnership. The MSPNs priority populations include African Americans, Native Americans, and other medically underserved residents of rural and urban areas. The MSPN has established a community infrastructure through formal collaborations with several community partners located in Baltimore City, the rural Eastern Shore, and Southern and Western Maryland, and among the Piscataway Conoy Tribe and the other 27 Native American Tribes in Maryland. Key partners also include the University of Maryland Eastern Shore and the University of Maryland Statewide Health Network. The MSPN has implemented innovative and successful programs in cancer health disparities research, outreach, and training; clinical trials education, health disparities policy, and resource leveraging. The MSPN addresses the goal of the NCI and the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to reduce and eventually eliminate cancer health disparities. Community–academic partnerships are the foundation of this successful network.