Making the most of small samples: Optimization of tissue allocation of pediatric solid tumors for clinical and research use. Issue 9 (15th July 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Pinches, R. Seth; Clinton, Catherine M.; Ward, Abigail; Meyer, Stephanie C.; Al‐Ibraheemi, Alyaa; Forrest, Suzanne J.; Strand, Gianna R.; Detert, Hillary; Piche‐Schulman, Anne; Gill, Kristen; Restrepo, Tamara; Tavares Proulx, Rosemarie; Perez‐Atayde, Antonio R.; Vargas, Sara O.; Shaikh, Raja; Weldon, Christopher; Alexandrescu, Sanda; Hong, Andrew L.; O'Neill, Allison F.; Hollowell, Monica; Harris, Marian H.; Janeway, Katherine A.; Crompton, Brian D.; Church, Alanna J.
• Is Part Of: Pediatric blood & cancer. Volume 67:Issue 9(2020)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2020-07-15
• Subjects: pathology -- solid tumor -- tissue allocation -- workflow; Tumors in children -- Periodicals; Blood -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Cancer in children -- Periodicals; 618.92
• DOI: 10.1002/pbc.28326
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1545-5009

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Tissue from pediatric solid tumors is in high demand for use in high‐impact research studies, making the allocation of tissue from an anatomic pathology laboratory challenging. We designed, implemented, and assessed an interdepartmental process to optimize tissue allocation of pediatric solid tumors for both clinical care and research. Methods: Oncologists, pathologists, surgeons, interventional radiologists, pathology technical staff, and clinical research coordinators participated in the workflow design. Procedures were created to address patient identification and consent, prioritization of protocols, electronic communication of requests, tissue preparation, and distribution. Pathologists were surveyed about the value of the new workflow. Results: Over a 5‐year period, 644 pediatric solid tumor patients consented to one or more studies requesting archival or fresh tissue. Patients had a variety of tumor types, with many rare and singular diagnoses. Sixty‐seven percent of 1768 research requests were fulfilled. Requests for archival tissue were fulfilled at a significantly higher rate than those for fresh tissue ( P > .001), and requests from resection specimens were fulfilled at a significantly higher rate than those from biopsies ( P > .0001). In an anonymous survey, seven of seven pathologists reported that the process had improved since the introduction of the electronic communication model. Conclusions: A collaborative and informed model for tissue allocation is successful in distributing archival and fresh tissue for clinical research studies. Our workflows and policies have gained pathologists' approval and streamlined our processes. As clinical and research programs evolve, a thoughtful tissue allocation process will facilitate ongoing research.