CytoJournal monographs: First CMAS (CytoJournal Monograph/Atlas Series) on science of cell-block making, titled “CellBlockistry 101 (<i>Text Book of Cell-blocking science</i>)”

Shidham, Vinod B.; Bose, Shikha; Baloch, Zubair W.; Layfield, Lester J.

doi:10.25259/cytojournal_16_2021

Cited by 8 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study did not precisely define the type of specimen undergoing testing for PD‐L1. Formalin fixed paraffin embedded cytologic material may be the optimal sub‐straight for immunohistochemical testing for most antigen targets 22,61,62 . Formalin fixed paraffin embedded cell block material most closely resembles biopsy and resection specimens used for diagnosis and immunohistochemical testing.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

PD‐L1 immunohistochemical testing: A review with reference to cytology specimens

Layfield

Zhang²,

Esebua

2022

Diagnostic Cytopathology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Immunotherapy based on disruption of the PD-1/PD-L1 axis is standard of care for many high stage malignancies including melanomas, non-small cell carcinomas of the lung, triple negative breast carcinomas, and squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck. Eligibility for immunotherapy requires immunohistochemical assessment of PD-L1 expression. Currently, many high stage malignancies are diagnosed by cytology and cytologic material is the only specimen available for ancillary testing. Formal guidelines do not currently exist defining the optimal specimen type, antibody to be used or the best scoring system for cytologic material. Significant information has been published for PD-L1 testing of pulmonary specimens but much less data exists for the reproducibility, accuracy and best practices for material obtained from other body sites and types of malignancy. Methods:We searched the PubMed data base for manuscripts relating to PD-L1 testing of cytologic specimens. The search period was between 2016 and 2022. The search terms used were PD-L1, cytology, FNA, immunotherapy, immunohistochemistry, immunocytochemistry, cytology-histology correlation. Cross referencing techniques were used to screen for the most relevant manuscripts. The abstracts of these were then reviewed for final data collection and analysis.Results: A total of 86 studies were identified conforming to study relevancy. These were reviewed in their entirety by two authors (LJL, TZ) for extraction of data. The majority of studies involved pulmonary specimens (79) with three relating to PD-L1 testing of head and neck cytologic specimens and one each for PD-L1 testing of cytology specimens from melanomas, pancreas, pleural fluids, and triple negative breast carcinomas. While smears could be used, most studies found cell blocks optimal for testing.Summary: Currently, four drugs are approved for immunotherapy based on PD-L1 status. These drugs require specific antibody clones as well as scoring systems. Scoring systems and cut points vary with the type of neoplasm being treated. Cytology specimens from the lung, head and neck and melanomas can all be used for PD-L1 testing with good agreement with corresponding histology specimens.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

PD‐L1 immunohistochemical testing: A review with reference to cytology specimens

Layfield

Zhang²,

Esebua

2022

Diagnostic Cytopathology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In nutshell, OA allows free dissemination with barrier-free academic recycling for best productivity. [ 3 - 7 ]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of cytopathology authors work: Comparative analysis based on Open-access cytopathology publications versus non-Open-access conventional publications

Kolpekwar

Shidham

2021

Cytojournal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Open access (OA) is based on a set of principles and a range of practices through which fruits of research are distributed online, free of cost, or other access barriers. According to the 2001 definition, OA publications are without barriers to copy or reuse with free access to readers. Some studies have reported higher rates of citation for OA publications. In this study, we analyzed the citation rates of OA and traditional nonOA (with or without free access) publications for authors publishing in the subspecialty of cytopathology during 2010–2015. Material and Methods: We observed and compared citation patterns for authors who had published in both OA and traditional non-OA, peer-reviewed, scientific, cytopathology journals. Thirty authors were randomly selected with criteria of publishing a total of at least five cytopathology articles over 2010–2015. Number of citations per article (CPA) (during 2010–2015) for OA publications (in CytoJournal and Journal of Cytology) and non-OA publications (in Diagnostic Cytopathology, Cytopathology, Acta Cytologica, Journal of American of Cytopathology, and Indian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology) was collected and compared statistically using two-tailed Student’s t-est. The data were collected manually through science citation analysis sites, mostly Google Scholar. Results: Thirty authors published 579 cytopathology articles in OA and non-OA journals. Average CPA for OA publications was 26.64. This was 11.35 higher than the average CPA) of non-OA conventional with subscription cytopathology journals (74% increase) and 11.76 higher than the average CPA of conventional cytopathology non-OA journal articles with free access (79% increase). These differences were statistically significantly with P < 0.05. Conclusion: We observed that the cytopathology publications in the OA journal attained a higher rate of CPA than the publications in the traditional non-OA journals in the field of cytopathology during 2010–2015.

show abstract

“…This feature makes the addition of any image from CytoJournal articles easily with a single click into PPT. [ 11 ]…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The hard copies (including Kindle version) of the CMAS #3 book (Hardcover: 978-1-955571-04-3; Paperback: 978-1-955571-07-4; e-Book: 978-1-955571-05-0; Library of Congress Control Number (LCCN): 2021949577) will be available to be purchased online from Amazon Books [ 6 ] similar to other CMAS books including CMAS #1 (CellBlockistry 101) and CMAS #2 Cytopathologic Diagnosis of Serous Fluids (second edition). [ 10 ] The electronic version will also be available under eCytoJournal: Site for reading CytoJournal articles and CMAS in book-like format with flipping pages https://cytojournal.com/eissues/ , [ 6 ] which is free for Cytopathology Foundation members https://cytojournal.com/cf-member/ [ 11 ] and at nominal cost for non-members. The chapter details are shown in [ Table 1 ].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Third CMAS (CytoJournal Monograph/Atlas Series) titled “Uterine Cervix Cancer and The Bethesda System”

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CytoJournal monographs: First CMAS (CytoJournal Monograph/Atlas Series) on science of cell-block making, titled “CellBlockistry 101 (Text Book of Cell-blocking science)”

Cited by 8 publications

References 6 publications

PD‐L1 immunohistochemical testing: A review with reference to cytology specimens

PD‐L1 immunohistochemical testing: A review with reference to cytology specimens

Impact of cytopathology authors work: Comparative analysis based on Open-access cytopathology publications versus non-Open-access conventional publications

Third CMAS (CytoJournal Monograph/Atlas Series) titled “Uterine Cervix Cancer and The Bethesda System”

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About