Context.— The adoption of digital capture of pathology slides as whole slide images (WSI) for educational and research applications has proven utility. Objective.— To compare pathologists' primary diagnoses derived from WSI versus the standard microscope. Because WSIs differ in format and method of observation compared with the current standard glass slide microscopy, this study is critical to potential clinical adoption of digital pathology. Design.— The study enrolled a total of 2045 cases enriched for more difficult diagnostic categories and represented as 5849 slides were curated and provided for diagnosis by a team of 19 reading pathologists separately as WSI or as glass slides viewed by light microscope. Cases were reviewed by each pathologist in both modalities in randomized order with a minimum 31-day washout between modality reads for each case. Each diagnosis was compared with the original clinical reference diagnosis by an independent central adjudication review. Results.— The overall major discrepancy rates were 3.64% for WSI review and 3.20% for manual slide review diagnosis methods, a difference of 0.44% (95% CI, −0.15 to 1.03). The time to review a case averaged 5.20 minutes for WSI and 4.95 minutes for glass slides. There was no specific subset of diagnostic category that showed higher rates of modality-specific discrepancy, though some categories showed greater discrepancy than others in both modalities. Conclusions.— WSIs are noninferior to traditional glass slides for primary diagnosis in anatomic pathology.

April 12, 2017 marked a significant day in the evolution of digital pathology in the United States, when the US Food and Drug Administration announced its approval of the Philips IntelliSite Pathology Solution for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology. Although this event is expected to facilitate more widespread adoption of whole slide imaging for clinical applications in the United States, it also raises a number of questions as to the means by which pathologists might choose to incorporate this technology into their clinical practice. This article from the College of American Pathologists Digital Pathology Committee reviews frequently asked questions on this topic and provides answers based on currently available information.

No abstract

No abstract

In order to determine the significance of 40% or more leukemic cells in hand-mirror configuration in the bone marrow (hand-mirror cell leukemia), eight of 34 cases of acute lymphoblastic leukemia and one of 17 cases of acute myeloblastic leukemia were collected from a six-year period. Five of the eight patients who had acute lymphoblastic leukemia were children; the remaining patients were less than 40 years of age. Females outnumbered males two to one. Cytochemical and electron-microscopic studies were performed for three cases. The clinical presentations were similar to those of patients without the hand-mirror cell variant, except for a high incidence of central nervous system relapses (over 50% of patients) despite prophylaxis. When compared with patients with acute leukemia in equivalent age and morphologic categories, adults with the hand-mirror cell variant had a similar, but not better, prognosis, while children with the variant had a poorer prognosis. Additional studies must be performed to determine whether the hand-mirror cell variant warrants separation from other forms of acute leukemia.