BACKGROUND: Before initiating cancer therapy, a diagnostic tumor tissue sample evaluated within a pathology laboratory by a pathologist is essential to confirm the malignancy type and provide key prognostic factors that direct the treatment offered. METHODS: Pathology evaluation includes multiple expensive reagents, complex equipment, and both laboratory and pathologist technical skills. By using breast cancer as an example, at a minimum, key tumor prognostic information required before the initiation of treatment includes subtype, tumor grade, tumor size, lymph node status when possible, and biomarker expression determined by immunohistochemistry for estrogen receptor. The additional determination of biomarker expression of progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) is the standard of care in high-resource settings, but assays may not be affordable in low-income and middleincome countries. RESULTS: With positive tests, patients are eligible for either tamoxifen (for estrogen receptor-positive/progesterone receptor-positive cancers) or monoclonal antibody therapy (for HER2-positive cancers). For settings in which endocrine therapy and/ or HER2-targeted therapy is unavailable, biomarker studies have no utility, and high-resource setting standards for pathology evaluation and reporting are unachievable. Resource-stratified pathology evaluation guidelines in cancer diagnosis have not been developed, in contrast to excellent comprehensive, resource-stratified clinical guidelines for use in low-income and middle-income countries, and these are long overdue. CONCLUSIONS: The challenges of pathology evaluation in the context of global health are being met by innovative solutions, which may change the face of pathology practice. Cancer 2020;126:2431-2438.

No abstract

Accessibility to immunohistochemistry (IHC) is invaluable to proper diagnosis and treatment of pediatric patients with malignant neoplasms. Whereas IHC is widely available in anatomic pathology laboratories in high-income countries, access to it in anatomic pathology laboratories of low- and middle-income countries remains a struggle, with many limitations. To advance the quality of the pathology service offered to children with cancer in areas with limited resources, a 5-day pathology training workshop was offered to pathologists and histotechnologists from various countries of the Central American and Caribbean region. An initial assessment of the workshop participants’ current laboratory capacities was performed, and a regional training center was selected. Didactic and hands-on activities were offered, and review and evaluation of the IHC slides produced during the training course were compared with original slides from the participants’ sites. This model of intensive 5-day training appears to be effective and can potentially be used in other budget-constrained regions. Moreover, it can serve as a continuing education activity for pathologists and histotechnologists, and as part of validations and quality improvement projects to build capacity and develop IHC assay proficiency in low- and middle-income countries.