"Medical Mishap" in Oregon

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Napoleon1801

Full Member
20+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Messages
605
Reaction score
135

Members don't see this ad.
 
I doubt the pathologists will get into hot water over this - I assume this is over IHC scoring

Any 4 tiered scoring system is going to have a lot of 1 step discrepancies (the CAP PT challenges for her2neu IHC prove this).

Also the new recommendations for her2neu low (1+) benefiting from treatment ….lots of extremely iffy 1+ calls being made b/c the path is scared to undercall and deny potentially helpful therapeutic
 
Members don't see this ad :)
There is a lot to unpack here with this story. Was the discrepancy in scoring from (1) the original case material being reviewed in an institutional consult with a difference of opinion or (2) repeat IHC testing on the original specimen or subsequent IHC testing came to a different conclusion? I suspect it's a little of both.

I also agree with MDNE. Aren't we supposed to giving out Herceptin to any breast tumor that basically doesn't move out of way quick enough.

I really think this story makes the case to just go for FISH testing upfront and let it be the reference lab's problem.
 
Leica is also one of the defendants it appears. Would be interesting to see the whole story.

Didn't realize Sonic had bought out Pacific coast. They been kind of buying up some scraps that labcorp and quest havent taken over.
 
Top