Conflicting pathology reports: a diagnostic dilemma.
case_report · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 25423268.
- Also identified by DOI 10.3171/2014.10.JNS131518.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
The differential diagnosis of a brain lesion with two discordant pathology reports includes the presence of collision tumor, metaplastic changes, and labeling errors that occurred during the processing of the specimen. The authors present a case in which the first brain biopsy from a 47-year-old patient with a history of heavy smoking was compatible with metastatic small cell carcinoma, and the second biopsy taken during decompression craniotomy 3 weeks later was compatible with WHO Grade IV glioblastoma. Using short tandem repeat (STR) analysis of the two specimens and nontumor-derived patient DNA, the authors found that the two specimens did not belong to the same individual. The authors conclude that allele imbalance or loss of heterozygosity detected by STR analysis is a reliable and valuable diagnostic tool for clarifying discrepancies in discordant pathology reports.
Medical subject headings
- Brain Neoplasms
- Carcinoma, Small Cell
- Diagnostic Errors
- Glioblastoma
- Pathology, Clinical