CASE REPORT: A 59-year-old Chinese male presented with a slow-growing cystic lesion over the left lower lateral canthal region. The lesion became progressively larger and nodular within the last 6 months. Histologically, the lesion is a well-circumscribed intradermal tumour with pushing borders extending into the subcutaneous tissue. The tumour cells were arranged in lobules of solid, papillary and cribriform architecture. The cells displayed uniform, medium-sized, round to oval nuclei with stippled chromatin pattern and ample eosinophilic granular cytoplasm. Intracellular mucin (as highlighted by mucicarmine stain) was observed in areas with focal extracellular mucin seen. Mitotic figures were not particularly impressive. By immunohistochemistry study, the tumour cells expressed ER, PR, CK7, GCDFP-15, mammaglobin and EMA diffusely. Chromogranin A and synaptophysin highlighted a significant number of tumour cells.
DISCUSSION: The morphology and immunohistochemical profile similarities between EMPSGC and solid papillary carcinoma of the breast (SPCOTB) makes the former considered as the cutaneous analogue of the latter. In fact, one should rule out the possibility of metastatic SPCOTB before considering the diagnosis of EMPSGC.
METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to cytopathology laboratories in 24 Asia-Pacific countries to explore the impact of restrictive measures on access to health care, use of general and personal protective equipment (PPE), and changes in cytology workflow and workload from February to April 2020.
RESULTS: A total of 167 cytopathology laboratories from 24 countries responded to the survey; the majority reported that restrictive measures that limited the accessibility of health care services had been implemented in their cities and/or countries (80.8%) and their hospitals (83.8%). The respondents noted that COVID-19 had an impact on the cytologic workflow as well as the workload. Approximately one-half of the participants reported the implementation of new biosafety protocols (54.5%) as well as improvements in laboratory facilities (47.3%). Rearrangement or redeployment of the workforce was reported in 53.3% and 34.1% of laboratories, respectively. The majority of the respondents reported a significant reduction (>10%) in caseload associated with both gynecological (82.0%) and nongynecological specimens (78.4%). Most laboratories reported no significant change in the malignancy rates of both gynecological (67.7%) and nongynecological specimens (58.7%) compared with the same period in 2019.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the survey demonstrated that the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a significant reduction in the number of cytology specimens examined along with the need to implement new biosafety protocols. These findings underscore the need for the worldwide standardization of biosafety protocols and cytology practice.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 691 allogeneic PBSCT patients between 2010-2017 in two centers.
RESULTS: The prevalence of cutaneous GVHD was 31.4% (217/691). No associations were detected with race, age or gender of donor and recipients. Cutaneous GVHD was associated with host cytomegalovirus (CMV) seropositivity (p<0.01), conditioning (p<0.01), GVHD prophylaxis (p=0.046) and survival (p<0.01). Majority developed the acute form (58.1%;126/217). Biopsies in 20.7% (45/217) showed 55.6% positivity for GVHD. Overall, involvement was non-severe. A majority demonstrated complete response (CR) to first-line corticosteroids (70.0%;152/217). Secondline therapies (extracorporeal phototherapy (ECP), psolaren ultraviolet A (PUVA), mycophenolate, tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, interleukins inhibitors, or CD20 monoclonal antibodies) were required in 65/217, with 38.5% CR. Second-line therapy was associated with gender (p=0.042), extra-cutaneous GVHD (p=0.021), treatment outcomes (p=0.026) and survival (p=0.048). Mortality in cutaneous GVHD was 24.0% with severe sepsis being the leading cause at Day 100 (7.8%) and 5-years (7.8%), and relapsed disease at 2-years (32.7%). In steroid refractoriness, severe GVHD caused 30.8% mortality. In cutaneous GVHD, survival at Day 100 was 95.4%; 80.2% at 2-years and 73.1% at 5-years. The median survival in cutaneous GVHD was significantly shorter at 55 months, compared to those without GVHD at 69 months (p=0.001).
CONCLUSION: Cutaneous involvement is the commonest clinical manifestation of GVHD. A larger national study is warranted to further analyse severity and outcome of multiorgan GVHD, and factors associated with steroid refractoriness.