Neoadjuvant-Adjuvant or Adjuvant-Only Pembrolizumab in Advanced Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Whether pembrolizumab given both before surgery (neoadjuvant therapy) and after surgery (adjuvant therapy), as compared with pembrolizumab given as adjuvant therapy alone, would increase event-free survival among patients with resectable stage III or IV melanoma is unknown. METHODS: In a phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with clinically detectable, measurable stage IIIB to IVC melanoma that was amenable to surgical resection to three doses of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab, surgery, and 15 doses of adjuvant pembrolizumab (neoadjuvant-adjuvant group) or to surgery followed by pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses) for approximately 1 year or until disease recurred or unacceptable toxic effects developed (adjuvant-only group). The primary end point was event-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Events were defined as disease progression or toxic effects that precluded surgery; the inability to resect all gross disease; disease progression, surgical complications, or toxic effects of treatment that precluded the initiation of adjuvant therapy within 84 days after surgery; recurrence of melanoma after surgery; or death from any cause. Safety was also evaluated. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 14.7 months, the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group (154 patients) had significantly longer event-free survival than the adjuvant-only group (159 patients) (P = 0.004 by the log-rank test). In a landmark analysis, event-free survival at 2 years was 72% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64 to 80) in the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group and 49% (95% CI, 41 to 59) in the adjuvant-only group. The percentage of patients with treatment-related adverse events of grades 3 or higher during therapy was 12% in the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group and 14% in the adjuvant-only group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with resectable stage III or IV melanoma, event-free survival was significantly longer among those who received pembrolizumab both before and after surgery than among those who received adjuvant pembrolizumab alone. No new toxic effects were identified. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and Merck Sharp and Dohme; S1801 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03698019.).

Pityriasis Rubra Pilaris After Moderna COVID-19 Vaccination: A Case Report and Literature Review.

ABSTRACT: To date, over 60% of the world's population has received at least 1 dose of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination, with over 12 billion doses administered globally. Commonly reported adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccination include fever, headache, myalgia, and injection site reactions. The spectrum of documented cutaneous reactions after COVID-19 vaccination is broad; however, pityriasis rubra pilaris (PRP) or PRP-like eruption secondary to COVID-19 vaccine is exceedingly rare, with only 17 cases previously reported to date in the English literature. In this article, we describe an additional case of COVID-19 vaccination-associated PRP in a 50-year-old woman with a history of metastatic breast carcinoma, who developed a widespread cutaneous eruption characteristic of PRP, including palmoplantar keratoderma, 10 days after her third dose of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. Punch biopsy specimen showed epidermal hyperplasia with overlying hyperkeratosis, alternating orthokeratosis and parakeratosis and focal follicular plugging, supporting the diagnosis of PRP. The patient improved within weeks of initiating oral acitretin and topical steroids, with resolution achieved after 3 months of continued therapy. To the best of our knowledge, this is the third reported case of Moderna COVID-19 vaccination-associated PRP and collectively the 18 th after the administration of all COVID-19 vaccines currently available, including Pfizer-BioNTech, and AstraZeneca.

The utility of digital pathology in improving the diagnostic skills of pathology trainees in commonly encountered pigmented cutaneous lesions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A single academic institution experience.

Digital pathology has become an integral part of pathology education in recent years, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, for its potential utility as a teaching tool that augments the traditional 1-to-1 sign-out experience. Herein, we evaluate the utility of whole slide imaging (WSI) in reducing diagnostic errors in pigmented cutaneous lesions by pathology fellows without subspecialty training in dermatopathology. Ten cases of 4 pigmented cutaneous lesions commonly encountered by general pathologists were selected. Corresponding whole slide images were distributed to our fellows, along with two sets of online surveys, each composed of 10 multiple-choice questions with 4 answers. Identical cases were used for both surveys to minimize variability in trainees' scores depending on the perceived level of difficulty, with the second set being distributed after random shuffling. Brief image-based teaching slides as self-assessment tool were provided to trainees between each survey. Pre- and post-self-assessment scores were analyzed. 61% (17/28) and 39% (11/28) of fellows completed the first and second surveys, respectively. The mean score in the first survey was 5.2/10. The mean score in the second survey following self-assessment increased to 7.2/10. 64% (7/11) of trainees showed an improvement in their scores, with 1 trainee improving his/her score by 8 points. No fellow scored less post-self-assessment than on the initial assessment. The difference in individual scores between two surveys was statistically significant (p = 0.003). Our study demonstrates the utility of WSI-based self-assessment learning as a source of improving diagnostic skills of pathology trainees in a short period of time.

Transition From a Standard to a Hybrid On-Site and Remote Anatomic Pathology Training Model During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic.

CONTEXT.­: As teaching hospitals institute social distancing and defer nonemergent procedures to cope with the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the need for daily on-site presence, unless necessary, has been reduced for all medical staff, including trainees. Pathology training programs must adapt to these changes to ensure overall safety without significantly compromising training and the educational mission of the institution. OBJECTIVE.­: To describe the hybrid on-site and remote anatomic pathology training model in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic that was implemented in our pathology department and report the clinical fellows' responses to the survey about their experiences. DESIGN.­: The hybrid model was implemented March 25, 2020. Fellows alternate weekly between working on site and working remotely. On site, fellows wear personal protective equipment and maintain social distancing. Remotely, fellows use digital pathology to review cases and supplement with online educational activities. Virtual "coffee breaks," meditation, and exercise are part of the curriculum. Online platforms, including WebEx, Google Classroom, and Canvas, are used to continue educational activities. The survey was open May 19 through June 8, 2020. RESULTS.­: Twenty-eight of the 29 clinical fellows (96%) responded. Many of the respondents indicated substantial increase in their skill with using digital pathology and online platforms during the pandemic. The top most helpful resources were the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology interactive microscopy courses (found very or somewhat helpful by 22 of 23 clinical fellows; 96%), ExpertPath (19 of 23; 82%), the College of American Pathologists virtual learning series (18 of 23; 78%), the World Health Organization Blue Books (16 of 23; 70%), the American Society of Cytopathology webinars (14 of 23; 61%), and our institutional digital slide collection (12 of 23; 52%). CONCLUSIONS.­: Hybrid on-site and remote training can maximize anatomic pathology learning opportunities while maintaining the safety of trainees, hospital personnel, and the community.

Factors Influencing US Allopathic Medical Students to Choose Pathology as a Specialty.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has highlighted the crucial role of pathologists in the health care system at a time of significant decline in the number of US medical students matching to pathology residency positions. To understand this decline, a national survey of fourth-year US allopathic medical students was conducted to assess experiences, knowledge, and attitudes of pathology and factors that impact specialty choice. Participating in a separate pathology course did not increase the probability of choosing pathology. Experiences significantly associated with choosing pathology included clinical or research opportunities in pathology during the last 2 years of medical school, autopsy observation/participation, and participation in pathology interest groups. Many respondents felt they were not sufficiently exposed to pathology to consider it as a specialty. Those who considered pathology but did not choose it were less likely to report understanding the activities of pathologists and being recruited by pathology faculty and more likely to express a preference for more direct patient contact as compared to those entering pathology. In general, respondents agreed that pathology has a good work-life balance and a satisfying degree of intellectual challenge. On the other hand, respondents generally agreed that information on social media and perception of the pathology job market do not seem to be positive and few agreed that pathology is a highly regarded specialty. We identify steps to address these issues and increase the number of US medical students choosing pathology as a specialty crucial to the future of medicine and public health.