Histopathology reporting of liver resection specimens for metastatic - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

histopathology reporting of
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Histopathology reporting of liver resection specimens for metastatic - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Histopathology reporting of liver resection specimens for metastatic colorectal carcinoma: Current practice versus set standards Trainee: Shaniar Aziz Audit supervisor: Dina Tiniakos Background / Introduction Liver metastasis is the major


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Histopathology reporting of liver resection specimens for metastatic colorectal carcinoma:

Current practice versus set standards

Trainee: Shaniar Aziz Audit supervisor: Dina Tiniakos

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Background / Introduction

  • Liver metastasis is the major complication from

colorectal adenocarcinoma (adenoCa) and major contribution to patient mortality

  • ~ 60% of colorectal adenoCa patients develop

metastases

  • In ~ 30% liver is the only site of metastasis
slide-3
SLIDE 3

Background (cont.)

  • Combined chemotherapy (chemoTx) regimens

have markedly improved tumour response and survival rate

  • ChemoTx effect can be assessed by radiological

evaluation Histology remains the best standard of assessing chemoTx tumour response

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Background (cont.)

RCPath recommendations

2012 RCPath dataset for liver resection specimens for primary and metastatic carcinoma: Same descriptors as in the colorectal dataset 2014 RCPath dataset for colorectal cancer histopathology reporting Recording degree of tumour regression following pre-

  • perative chemoTx as a core data item

(descriptive 4-tier system)

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Response to pre-operative chemotherapy:

Descriptive 4-tier system (2014 RCPath dataset)

  • no viable tumour cells (fibrosis or mucus lakes only)
  • single cells or scattered small groups of cancer

cells

  • residual cancer outgrown by fibrosis
  • minimal or no regression (extensive residual tumour)
slide-6
SLIDE 6

Tumour regression grade (TRG)

Based on the presence of residual tumour cells and extent of tumour fibrosis:

Rubbia-Brandt L et al. Ann Oncol 2006

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Background (cont.)

  • ChemoTx regimens may affect

non-neoplastic liver parenchyma causing:  steatohepatitis  sinusoidal endothelial injury  nodular regenerative hyperplasia (NRH) 

  • ther side effects

Rubbia-Brandt L et al. Annals of Oncology 2004

slide-8
SLIDE 8
  • Varies with the agent used
  • Oxaliplatin may induce SOS (50% of patients)
  • Irinotecan may contribute to steatohepatitis
  • Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome

nodular regenerative hyperplasia portal hypertension

RCPath liver resection specimens dataset 2012

Background liver: Neoadjuvant therapy effects

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS)

  • Microvascular/sinusoidal injury
  • Also called toxic microvascular injury
  • Previously known as veno-occlusive disease (VOD)

Aetiology

  • chemoTx effect
  • ischaemic
  • congestive
  • infiltrative injuries
slide-10
SLIDE 10

SOS (cont.)

Burt A, MacSween’s pathology of liver 2012

  • sinusoidal oedema and haemorrhage
  • fibrin deposition
  • severe sinusoidal congestion => necrosis
  • healing with concentric/eccentric intimal

fibrosis/ fibrous obliteration

  • zone 3 atrophy and sinusoidal fibrosis

Late features:

  • cirrhosis (congestive type),

relative sparing of portal tracts

  • regenerative nodules (NRH)
slide-11
SLIDE 11

Peliosis

  • Cystic blood-filled spaces
  • Rupture of reticulin fibres
  • Randomly distributed
  • D.D.

– evacuation of hepatocyte plates seen after zonal hepatocellular dropout but without loss of reticulin fibres – Sometimes confused with extreme sinusoidal dilatation

Burt A, MacSween’s pathology of liver 2012

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Background liver: Neoadjuvant therapy effects

2012 RCPath dataset for histopathology reporting of liver resection specimens for primary and secondary colorectal adenocarcinoma:

  • Assessment of presence and severity of

background liver changes

  • Qualitative estimate of the severity of

chemotherapy-related effects in the background liver parenchyma (although changes may be heterogeneous)

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Aims of the audit

  • Evaluate if required standards were achieved in

routine histopathology reporting of liver resection specimens for colorectal adenoCa metastasis 2009/2010 vs 2013 (post 2012 RCPath dataset)

  • Document % reported cases in which gross and

microscopic description proforma were used

  • Document % cases in which the gross/microscopic

items were mentioned/not mentioned in the report

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Aims of the audit (cont.)

  • Collect information on post-chemoTx effect in

hepatic resection specimens for colorectal adenoCa liver metastasis

  • 2009/2010 vs 2013: assess completeness of

documentation regarding sinusoidal endothelial injury and other chemoTx effects in the non- neoplastic background liver tissue

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Standards used

  • Local proforma for macroscopy and histology

reporting

  • 2012 RCPath Dataset for histopathology

reporting of liver resection specimens for primary and metastatic carcinoma

  • Histological grading of tumour response to

chemotherapy and grading of chemoTx-related injury in background liver

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Audit methods

Time period audited:

  • 12 months (all cases in 2013):

Surgical specimens of liver resection for metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma reported in RVI were included in the audit (n=60)

  • Randomly

selected cases

  • f

primary colorectal adenoCa with liver metastasis from years 2009 and 2010 (n=26)

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Data documented

Macroscopic details:

  • specimen type, weight, dimensions
  • surgical resection area size/appearance
  • liver capsule
  • tumour number/size/site/distance to margin
  • macroscopic vascular invasion
  • vascular margin
  • background liver description
  • background tissue block
  • lymph nodes
slide-18
SLIDE 18

Data documented (cont.)

Microscopic details:

  • Tumour: histological type, differentiation, fibrous

capsule, invasive margin, lymphocytic infiltrate

  • Invasion: lymphatic, vascular, perineural, bile duct

colonization,

  • Post-chemoTx (PCE), extent of PCE
  • Tumour regression grade
  • Satellite lesions
  • Margins
  • Lymph node status
  • Background liver: steatosis, steatohepatitis, fibrosis,

NRH, sinusoidal obstruction syndrome, peliosis

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Results: Use of proforma

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% Macroproforma Microproforma 2009/10 2013

MACROPROFORMA MICROPROFORMA 2009/10 2013

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Results: Specimen details

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Type Weight Dimension Resection area: size Resection area: appearance

2009/10 2013

2009/10 2013

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Results: Macroscopic tumour details

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% capsule Number Size Site Distance to margin 200 9/10 201

2009/10 2013

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Results: Macro, other details

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Vascular invasion Vascular margin Background description Background block Lymph node

2009/10 2013

2009/10 2013

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Results: Tumour histology

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Histology type Differentiation Fibrous capsule Invasive margin Lymphocytic infiltrate

2009/10 2013

2009/10 2013

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Microscopy: Invasion

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Lymphatic Perineural Vascular Bile duct

2009/10 2013

2009/10 2013

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Microscopy: ChemoTx effect

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Postchemotheapy effect (PCE)(assume) PCE in conclusion PCE extent Tumour regression grade

2009/10 2013

2009/10 2013 2009/10 2013

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Microscopy: Margins

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Closest hepatic margin Capsular breach Vascular margin Satellite lesion

2009/10 2013

2009/10 2013

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Microscopy: Lymph nodes

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Presnt/absent Site Number examined Number Positive

2009/10 2013

2009/10 2013

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Microscopy: Background liver

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Background liver Steatosis Steatosis grade Steatohepatitis Sinusoidal

  • bstruction

syndrome

2009/10 2013

2009/10 2013

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Microscopy: Background liver

0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00%

Fibrosis NRH Sinusoidal fibrosis Perivenular fibrosis peliosis

2009/10 2013

2009/10 2013

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Conclusions

  • Many items (gross and microscopic) were mentioned in >90% (some

items=100%) of cases in both groups.

  • Use of macroproforma significantly improved in 2013 vs 2009/2010.
  • The microproforma was rarely used
  • Negative details not adequately mentioned in macro- and microscopic

descriptions (both groups)

  • Inadequate documentation of post-chemoTx effect on the tumour

(both groups)

  • Tumour regression not graded (both groups)
  • Post-chemoTx effects in non-neoplastic liver parenchyma not

adequately documented (both groups)

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Recommendations for histopathology reporting liver resection specimens for colorectal adenoCa metastasis

  • Adherence to the use microproforma and macroproforma
  • Reporting of negative findings
  • More detailed description of tumour post-chemoTx

effect Use of a tumour regression grading system to semi-quantitate post-chemoTx effect

  • Include in the microproforma more detailed description
  • f chemoTx effects in the background liver parenchyma
slide-32
SLIDE 32

Action plan

  • Feedback audit results to histopathology

consultants, trainees and advanced practitioners

  • Re-audit after the implementation of the above

recommendations to measure degree

  • f

improvement

slide-33
SLIDE 33

References

  • 1. Rubbia-Brandt L, et al. Severe hepatic sinusoidal obstruction associated with oxaliplatin- based chemotherapy in patients

with metastatic colorectal cancer. Annals of Oncology 2004; 15:460–466.

  • 2. Adam R, et al. Rescue surgery for unresectable colorectal liver metastases downstaged by chemotherapy: a model to

predict long-term survival. Annals of Surgery 2004; 240 (4):644–657.

  • 3. Rubbia-Brandt L, et al. Importance of histological tumour response assessment in predicting the outcome in patients

with colorectal liver metastases treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy followed by liver surgery. Annals of Oncology 2007; 18:299–304.

  • 4. Rubbia-Brandt L, et al. Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome and nodular regenerative hyperplasia are frequent oxaliplatin-

associated liver lesions and partially prevented by bevacizumab in patients with hepatic colorectal metastasis. Histopathology 2010; 56:430-439.

  • 5. Zorzi D, et al. Chemotherapy-associated hepatotoxicity and surgery for colorectal liver metastasis. British Journal of

Surgery 2007; 94 274-286.

  • 6. Morine Y, et al. Evaluation and management of hepatic injury induced by oliplantin-based chemotherapy in patients with

hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastasis. Hepatology Research 2014; 44:59-69.

  • 7. Vigano L, et al. Liver resection for colorectal metastases after chemotherapy. Impact of chemotherapy-related liver

injuries, pathological tumour response, and micrometastases on long-term survival. Annals of Surgery 2013; 258: 731-741.

  • 8. Royal College of Pathologists Standards and datasets for reporting cancers. Dataset for histopathology reporting of liver

resection specimens (including gall bladder) and liver biopsies for primary and metastatic carcinoma 2nd edition, 2012. http://www.rcpath.org/Resources/RCPath/Migrated%20Resources/Documents/G/G050_LiverDataset_Jun12.pdf

  • 9. Royal College of Pathologists Standards and datasets for reporting cancers. Dataset for colorectal cancer

histopathology reports, 3rd edition, 2014. ttp://www.rcpath.org/Resources/RCPath/Migrated%20Resources/Documents/G/G049_ColorectalDataset_July14.pdf

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Thank you