ArticleCancer cytopathology2025
Rapid on-site evaluation using telecytology: Quality assurance study at a high-volume cancer center.
Article in Cancer cytopathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing preoperative assessment of salivary gland lesions: updates and practical implications in the Milan System 2nd edition.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Review
- Integration of Digital Cytology in Quality Assurance Programs for Cytopathology.Acta cytologica · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTelecytology-assisted rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) offers a cost-effective method to enhance minimally invasive biopsies like fine needle aspiration and core biopsies with touch preparation. By reducing nondiagnostic sampling and the need for repeat procedures, ROSE via telecytology facilitates prompt triage for ancillary tests, improving patient management. This study examines cases initially deemed adequate for diagnosis during telecytology-assisted ROSE but later categorized as nondiagnostic at final evaluation (NDIS).
designWe performed a retrospective analysis of telecytology-assisted ROSE cases over 7 years at a major cancer center, focusing on fine needle aspiration and touch preparation of core biopsies. Each case was thoroughly reviewed, correlating with clinical data and concurrent core biopsies or subsequent excisions. The study identified leading factors contributing to NDIS.
resultsThe average NDIS rate was 0.06% (42/70,612). Misinterpretation of benign or reactive cells as neoplastic was the leading cause (76.2%) of discrepancies between original ROSE and final diagnosis. Kidney biopsies had the highest NDIS rate (0.90%), primarily because of misinterpreting nonneoplastic cells. Thyroid biopsies were linked to quantitative threshold issues (0.10%). NDIS events were most associated with misinterpretation in kidney, pancreas, gastrointestinal tract, and lung biopsies.
conclusionIn conclusion, the NDIS rate in telecytology-assisted ROSE is low, but quality assurance identified areas for improvement. Recognizing site-specific pitfalls during telecytology-assisted ROSE can enhance diagnostic accuracy and optimize patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.