Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Cutan Pathol ; 46(7): 484-489, 2019 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30895633

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Muir-Torre syndrome (MTS) is a rare inherited syndrome, with an increased risk of sebaceous and visceral malignancy. Prior reports suggest screening for mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency may be warranted in patients <50 years and when sebaceous neoplasms are located on a non-head and neck location. Previously, appropriate use criteria (AUC) were developed for clinical scenarios in patients >60 years concerning the use of MMR protein immunohistochemistry (MMRP-IHC). This analysis explores the appropriateness of testing in patients ≤60 years. METHODS: Panel raters from the AUC Task Force rated the use of MMRP-IHC testing for MTS for previously rated scenarios with the only difference being age. RESULTS: Results verify the previously developed AUC for the use of MMRP-IHC in neoplasms associated with MTS in patients >60 years. Results also show that in patients ≤60 years with a single sebaceous tumor on a non-head and neck site, MMRP-IHC testing should be considered. Testing can also be considered with a 2-antibody panel on periocular sebaceous carcinoma in younger patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings align with known evidence supporting the need to incorporate clinical parameters in identifying patients at risk for MTS, with age being a factor when considering MMRP-IHC testing.


Subject(s)
Aging , Muir-Torre Syndrome , Aged , Aging/metabolism , Aging/pathology , Female , Humans , Immunohistochemistry , Male , Middle Aged , Muir-Torre Syndrome/diagnosis , Muir-Torre Syndrome/metabolism , Muir-Torre Syndrome/pathology
2.
J Am Acad Dermatol ; 80(1): 189-207.e11, 2019 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29689323

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Appropriate use criteria (AUC) provide physicians guidance in test selection, and can affect health care delivery, reimbursement policy, and physician decision-making. OBJECTIVES: The American Society of Dermatopathology, with input from the American Academy of Dermatology and the College of American Pathologists, sought to develop AUC in dermatopathology. METHODS: The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology, which combines evidence-based medicine, clinical experience, and expert judgment, was used to develop AUC in dermatopathology. RESULTS: With the number of ratings predetermined at 3, AUC were developed for 211 clinical scenarios involving 12 ancillary studies. Consensus was reached for 188 (89%) clinical scenarios, with 93 (44%) considered "usually appropriate" and 52 (25%) "rarely appropriate" and 43 (20%) having "uncertain appropriateness." LIMITATIONS: The methodology requires a focus on appropriateness without comparison between tests and irrespective of cost. CONCLUSIONS: The ultimate decision to order specific tests rests with the physician and is one where the expected benefit exceeds the negative consequences. This publication outlines the recommendations of appropriateness-the AUC for 12 tests used in dermatopathology. Importantly, these recommendations may change considering new evidence. Results deemed "uncertain appropriateness" and where consensus was not reached may benefit from further research.


Subject(s)
Medical Overuse/prevention & control , Skin Diseases/pathology , Dermatology/standards , Humans , Pathology, Clinical/standards
3.
J Cutan Pathol ; 45(8): 563-580, 2018 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29566273

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Appropriate use criteria (AUC) provide physicians guidance in test selection, and can affect health care delivery, reimbursement policy and physician decision-making. OBJECTIVES: The American Society of Dermatopathology, with input from the American Academy of Dermatology and the College of American Pathologists, sought to develop AUC in dermatopathology. METHODS: The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology, which combines evidence-based medicine, clinical experience and expert judgment, was used to develop AUC in dermatopathology. RESULTS: With the number of ratings predetermined at 3, AUC were developed for 211 clinical scenarios involving 12 ancillary studies. Consensus was reached for 188 (89%) clinical scenarios, with 93 (44%) considered "usually appropriate," 52 (25%) "rarely appropriate" and 43 (20%) "uncertain appropriateness." LIMITATIONS: The methodology requires a focus on appropriateness without comparison between tests and irrespective of cost. CONCLUSIONS: The ultimate decision of when to order specific test rests with the physician and is one where the expected benefit exceeds the negative consequences. This publication outlines the recommendations of appropriateness-AUC for 12 tests used in dermatopathology. Importantly, these recommendations may change considering new evidence. Results deemed "uncertain appropriateness" and where consensus was not reached may benefit from further research.


Subject(s)
Dermatology , Evidence-Based Medicine , Pathology , Diagnostic Tests, Routine , Humans , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...