Set the World on Fire, but Don’t Burnout

Hello everyone and welcome back!

So here I am: a med school matriculant, top-choice program matched, doing exactly the training and work I’ve wanted to since before medical school. Totally made it! But before I go all “Fresh Prince of Maywood” on you, there’s a lot to unpack within the word “residency.” I’ve discussed this before, comparing pathology subspecialties with my primary care friend Dr. Raja’s rotation schedule, but you probably already know a little about what pathology residents do. I want to talk about what most folks might not know, why most residents absolutely disappear from their families or loved ones, and why going in with already greying hair isn’t going to make this any better, ha-ha…

Image 1. Me, and me. Look what 6 months of residency can do. Wow. Kidding. It’s an Instagram filter. Or is it…? It is. But what if it isn’t….?

I’m a resident at Loyola Medicine in Maywood, IL; I also went to undergrad (over a decade ago) at Loyola Chicago. So, for me, this is a very cool full-circle experience. I bring this symmetry up because a lot of people talk about the “culture” of an institution when they’re looking for a perfect match. I’ve talked about my experiences with hospitals’ institutional cultures before, at Bronx Care, Staten Island, Mayo Clinic, Danbury, Brooklyn, and more before medical school. I choose to highlight Loyola for you both because it’s already home to me, and also because it has a unique disposition.  When you walk across the stage at graduation, Loyolans are instructed to “Set the world on fire”—a quote from the university’s namesake and patron St. Ignacious Loyola. It follows a Jesuit tradition of valuing education as one of the most powerful tools to address social inequality, injustice, poverty, and whatever ails our society. By being bold and passionate (like a fire, get it…?) true leadership can manifest in graduates’ futures.

Image 2. Me again. Imbued with Jesuit mantras, ready to set the world “aflame.” Notice me in the bottom right, however, not really seeming to pay attention to the stage. Thinking about my poor future colleagues perhaps…

But all graduations are decorated with pomp and circumstance. As graduates sit and wait for their name, they are pontificated at about the importance, poignancy, and grand scale of opportunity that awaits them. But what happens after graduating, college, or graduate school, or medical school? The answer varies widely for many, but I can speak to those who end up with the long white coats. I’ll be honest, allegorically, college is a lesson in walking, graduate school is a lesson in running, medical school is a lesson in cartwheels—after you’ve somewhat mastered this, the world that awaits you demands powerful cartwheels (with tricks) up multiple Mt. Everests, and you might be able to use the bathroom…you might. Haha, a little hyperbole. I mean I am SO glad pathology training isn’t like some other specialties (looking at you surgery…) but the demand is there, nonetheless. I would say ours might be more cerebral because, what we trade in for not having an intern year, we are “gifted” with having to lean 4+ years of material presented as an iceberg tip in medical school.

In a recent Inside the Lab podcast, the topic of burnout was discussed. (Check it out here!) Labratorians—and healthcare staff in every role—have been feeling the COVID push all year. More is expected of us, more is demanded of our system and its output, and there is no relief or break in sight. That prolonged demand on our expertise (and time) puts a significant strain on all our collective psyche’s. Nowhere is that more apparent than in healthcare. Paramedics run long uninterrupted shifts seeing tragic emergency one after another. Nurses do 12hr shifts back to back for days, especially when there isn’t enough staff to support days off (while patient census climbs higher and higher). But in medicine, poor medical school post-graduates are expected to literally “reside” in the hospital, ergo resident. The term came from the training model coined at Johns Hopkins in the early 1900s. And, up until a few years ago, the powers that be decided that residents should log no more than a maximum of 80 hours a week with the longest shift you can work 24 hours. Fun fact: the IRS, yes those guys, defines full-time work as 30-40 hours per week or 130 hours per month. If you work a “full time” job, you probably work 40 hours a week/160 hours a month. So, for young resident physicians: that two full time jobs, coming in hot at just about the average US salary of 55-60k. Outstanding. However, while I find myself lucky and would anecdotally say that I don’t think I’ll be getting any notifications or flags on logging too many hours at the hospital, the reality is that many physician trainees work right up to the maximum (and more). The old guard cites that 80 hours isn’t enough time to train a functioning physician, as they leave patient care at a sensitive time where they effectively abandon their learning. But …burnout. The “reduction” to 80 hours one would think reduces stress and burnout, but lo and behold a paper (from FIFTEEN years ago) says nu-uh. “Changes in parameters of resident and faculty emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment did not show statistical significance…Despite successful reductions in resident work hours, measures of burnout were not significantly affected.” (JAMA, 2004)

Image 3. I’m not here to cite stuffy papers and the voluminous research on physician and resident burnout. Instead, I’m here to highlight the motivations those of us in healthcare cite as our driving force to keep at it, especially in a pandemic.

Regardless, those of us in postgraduate medical training are here for a reason. I identify as one of the few who finds himself in a lucky spot, where my institution—and my profession of choice—don’t demand that kind of hourly expectation of me. But many of my other colleges aren’t as lucky. Surgeons, internists, family doctors, and more are working themselves to the limit. And that doesn’t include anything about the COVID pandemic. Whether you’re a graduate of Loyola or not, we’re all expected to “set the world on fire,” I just hope we don’t burn out in the process. Stay in tune with your needs and your support system, learn to recognize signs of burnout as much more than fatigue, and remember to extend compassion to everyone—you never know what load they might be carrying. Remember those things and you can navigate a packed work-week…or a pandemic!

Thanks for reading!

See you next time!

Constantine E. Kanakis MD, MSc, MLS(ASCP)CM is a first-year resident physician in the Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Department at Loyola University Medical Center in Chicago with interests in hematopathology, transfusion medicine, bioethics, public health, and graphic medicine. He is a certified CAP inspector, holds an ASCP LMU certificate, and xxx. He was named on the 2017 ASCP Forty Under 40 list, The Pathologist magazine’s 2020 Power List and serves on ASCP’s Commission for Continuing Professional Development, Social Media Committee, and Patient Champions Advisory Board. He was featured in several online forums during the peak of the COVID pandemic discussing laboratory-related testing considerations, delivered a TEDx talk called “Unrecognizable Medicine,” and sits on 
the Auxiliary Board of the American Red Cross in Illinois. Dr. Kanakis is active on social media; follow him at @CEKanakisMD.

Solving Complex Clinical Puzzles: A Memorable Autopsy Experience

I walked into the autopsy suite, trembling and drenched in sweat, even though the atmospheric temperature was as cool as it could ever be. It was my second autopsy experience as a pathology resident and I could not make out exactly how I was feeling. My first session had exposed me to the critical role of pathologists in solving complex clinical puzzles and had left me shaken for days. And, I still wasn’t sure how the second session was going to be. But, one thing I was sure of was the fact that I still felt uncomfortable.

Not uncomfortable because of the task that had been given to us to find out the cause of death of the person I was going to meet. But I felt very uneasy with the fact that I did not know what to expect, yet again. The first session had been that of a middle-aged woman. This was going to be a case of a young man. Two different scenarios and diagnoses. I did not know what to expect. My stomach turned and churned and I could also feel my heart thumping loudly in my chest.

I looked up at my senior resident, with my attending physician observing our every move. He looked very comfortable with what we were about to do. He seemed to approach the entire situation like it was a routine procedure for him. I questioned myself, “would I ever get comfortable with doing autopsies like him?”

I listened attentively as the senior resident walked me through the process of performing an autopsy and what our duties as pathologists was supposed to be. I tried to listen as my senior colleague who was obviously very familiar with the process gave me a detailed lecture. I felt my mind wandering away, even though it seemed as though I was paying attention to what he was saying. My attention drifted back and forth as I couldn’t help thinking about so many other things including the complexities surrounding life and death.

As we went through the organs and finally began working on the lungs and heart were his primary pathologies were supposed to be, I was amazed at the pathology I was being exposed to. His bilateral lungs were severely fibrotic, encased with numerous calcified nodules that eventually turned out to be non-caseating granulomas. He also had calcified hilar nodules also confirmed histopathologically as non-caseating granulomas and his heart was markedly enlarged, with hypertrophy of biventricular walls, more prominent on the right side. His pulmonary arteries also showed signs of severe vascular disease with hyalinization and fibrosis. He had disseminated sarcoidosis, with his heart and lungs more severely affected. The sarcoid granulomas had spared the other organs and had domiciled in the lungs, with downstream effects on the heart. He fit the stereotypical case of cor-pulmonale-right sided heart failure from severe lung disease. The facts of the case suddenly began to make a lot of sense to me. I thus had a better understanding of why the patient had progressed so rapidly with his disease course with a fatal outcome.

I realized later that all my prior apprehension about performing the autopsy had been replaced by an interesting curiosity to find out more about his disease. My initial trepidation about performing that autopsy was quickly replaced by a determination to answer the “why” question. I became more involved and present with the procedure that by the time we left the autopsy suite, I thought I had learned something new that day.

That experience of being able to solve a clinical puzzle from autopsy findings made a huge impact on me. Therefore, the role of pathology and laboratory medicine in the advancement of medicine and patient care can never be overstated.

-Evi Abada, MD, MS is a Resident Physician in anatomic and clinical pathology at the Wayne State University School of Medicine/Detroit Medical Center in Michigan. She earned her Masters of Science in International Health Policy and Management from Brandeis University in Massachusetts, and is a global health advocate. Dr. Abada has been appointed to serve on the ASCP’s Resident’s Council and was named one of ASCP’S 40 under Forty honorees for the year 2020. You can follow her on twitter @EviAbadaMD.

Critical Values: The Burden, Promise and Realization of Virtual Interviews for Pathology Residency During a Pandemic

The SARS-CoV-2 virus continues to cause increased infections and deaths around the world with considerable impact on clinical and laboratory medicine communities. Meanwhile, medical students and the medical community are also undertaking the yearly tribulation of residency interview season. Following the May announcement by the Coalition for Physician Accountability’s Work Group on Medical Students,1 the 2020 interview season will be entirely conducted utilizing virtual interviews. In pointed response to this change in format, residency programs rapidly scrambled to bolster websites, increase their social media presence, add virtual tours and prepare for the virtual interview format prior to the start of interview season. Now, at the midpoint of interview season, it is evident that some burdens of traditional on-site interviews are indeed being alleviated. Whether or not online resident socials and virtual tours can sufficiently substitute for all aspects of on-site visits and if the promise of increased spread of geographic and cultural diversity can be realized remains to be accurately assessed. The survival of the virtual format may even depend on this assessment.

The average cost of traditional on-site pathology interviews has continued to increase for medical students from a per person average of $3400 in 2015 to $4000 in 2020.2 Much of this expense comes from travel/transportation while some pathology programs provided accommodations. Additionally, interview season required about 20 total days away from medical school. To cover these expenses, about half (49%) of medical students borrow money for interviews . Not surprisingly, the majority of them agree that travel (79%) and lodging (65%) are overly burdensome components of interview season.2 Beyond accounting, the salient impact of these time and financial investments is that they were influencing the majority (58%) of interview decisions.

While the rising time and financial burdens of traditional on-site residency interviews were well-known and there was and continues to be a myriad of ideas3 on how to best address these concerns and the match overall, a small burgeoning literature on virtual resident interviews was available prior to the pandemic that showed promise for addressing these concerns.4,5 That is, in the 2020 – 2021 residency interview season, medical students are estimated to spend about 3.5 hours on an average virtual interview day instead of the 8 hour day of a traditional interview and through the elimination of travel time they may spend 7 less days on the interview trail. Thus, the cost of interviewing is also projected to be skeletonized to that of necessary professional clothing and computer hardware. Additional promising data from this small body of research suggests that 85% of virtual interviewees were satisfied with their understanding of the program and their ability to present themselves to residency programs.6 Furthermore, the fact that the residency program’s rank list showed no significant impact based on whether candidates interviewed virtually or in-person suggests that residency programs may feel capable of fairly assessing candidates.7

Beyond time and financial savings for pathology residency applicants and the assessment of candidates by residency programs and vice versa, the measurability of additional outcomes may be critical to the continuation of virtual resident interviews. In particular, there is great interest in online social events and interview day resident panels as a sufficient substitute for the naturally evolving casual conversations that occur during the dinners, lunches and tours available with on-site visits. Also, whether or not these socials combined with interviews with a small subset of faculty can accurately portray a pathology residency program’s culture. In prior surveys that compared in-person, virtual or a combined approach to interviews, candidates always favored in-person assessment when given the choice. The present circumstance will perhaps be the best attempt at an unbiased assessment of the perception of culture through virtual interviews. Last but not least, given the turbulent nature of race relations and culture in the United States over the last year combined with the ability of applicants to virtually interview without travel or financial restrictions, it will be absolutely critical to understand if virtual interviews portend to increase the spread of geographic and cultural diversity among applicants to pathology residency programs. That is, if current trends in resident recruitment can be altered from the current rate of 40 – 60% intraregional resident matriculation or whether the needs of financial and family assistance and/or intraregional familiarity are insurmountable.8 For if the potential for greater diversity is attainable in a significant manner that can be perpetuated into the future, it will be hard to argue for a return to the traditional format. That said, there will likely be bias in the data as an increasing number of pathology residency programs have heard the call to arms and are marching towards diversity, inclusion and equity through greater promotion, recruitment and retention efforts.9

In a tumultuous year that has included race relations reminiscent of the Civil Rights Era combined with a total number of worldwide pandemic deaths similar to the 1957 or 1968 influenza pandemics, medicine continues its steady progression toward improved healthcare and education for all. Following the May 2020 recommendations to implement virtual residency interviews, pathology residency programs moved expeditiously to bolster their websites, increase their social media presence, add virtual tours and prepare for the virtual interview format. Amid this tumult, the virtual interview format has already served to lessen the burdens of time and cost while also serving the practical needs of interview assessments for both medical students and residency programs. Yet, only time and methodical assessment will tell if the virtual interview format eliminates the impact of these burdens on residency decisions, allows both parties to adequately assess cultural fit and if the format and its advantages are here to stay. Regardless, it is imperative that the emphasis on diversity, inclusion and equity remains irrespective of future format.

References

  1. The Coalition for Physician Accountability’s Work Group on Medical Students in the Class of 2021 Moving Across Institutions for Post Graduate Training Final Report and Recommendations for Medical Education Institutions of LCME-Accredited, U.S. Osteopathic, and Non-U.S. Medical School Applicants.
  2. Pourmand, A., Lee, H., Fair, M., Maloney, K. & Caggiula, A. Feasibility and usability of tele-interview for medical residency interview. Western Journal of Emergency Medicine 19, 80–86 (2018).
  3. Hammoud, M. M., Andrews, J. & Skochelak, S. E. Improving the Residency Application and Selection Process: An Optional Early Result Acceptance Program. JAMA – Journal of the American Medical Association 323, 503–504 (2020).
  4. Chandler, N. M., Litz, C. N., Chang, H. L. & Danielson, P. D. Efficacy of Videoconference Interviews in the Pediatric Surgery Match. J. Surg. Educ. 76, 420–426 (2019).
  5. Vining, C. C. et al. Virtual Surgical Fellowship Recruitment During COVID-19 and Its Implications for Resident/Fellow Recruitment in the Future. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 1 (2020). doi:10.1245/s10434-020-08623-2
  6. Healy, W. L. & Bedair, H. Videoconference Interviews for an Adult Reconstruction Fellowship: Lessons Learned. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery – American Volume 99, E114 (2017).
  7. Vadi, M. G. et al. Comparison of web-based and face-to-face interviews for application to an anesthesiology training program: a pilot study. Int. J. Med. Educ. 7, 102–108 (2016).
  8. Shappell, C. N., Farnan, J. M., McConville, J. F. & Martin, S. K. Geographic Trends for United States Allopathic Seniors Participating in the Residency Match: a Descriptive Analysis. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 34, 179–181 (2019).
  9. Ware, A. D. et al. The “Race” Toward Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity in Pathology: The Johns Hopkins Experience. Acad. Pathol. 6, (2019).

-Josh Klonoski, MD, PhD, is a chief resident at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, with a focus in neuroinfectious disease and global health. He has completed the first year of a neuropathology fellowship (out of sequence) and is in his final year of an anatomical and clinical pathology residency. Dr. Klonoski will return to the second neuropathology fellowship year in 2021 – 2022 and apply for a mentored clinical scientist research career development award (K08). The focus of his laboratory research is influenza and active projects include flu pneumonia, super-infections, encephalitis and oncolytic virotherapy.

Virtually Amazing

Hello everyone and welcome back!

I’ve appreciated some amazing feedback from my previous post discussing how doctors can sometimes be patients too, and the challenges one might face in different roles within our health care system. Not only a challenge of roles, but those that struggle with invisible illness have unique perspectives on patient care.

That said, this month let me take a break from all the fun content found between cases, concepts, and trends in pathology and laboratory medicine, and celebrate our amazingly successful (and virtual) Annual ASCP Meeting!

Image 1. Just look at this virtual lobby! Set aside that in-person connectivity dissapointment and just appreciate the quality put into this visually! More of my oggling to come in further images…

It was awesome. But don’t just take my word for it, we’re all people of science here, right? So let’s do it by the numbers!

  • 133 educational sessions
  • 3 general sessions
  • 4 named lectures
  • 36 round table sessions which included topics like wellness, problem-solving, collaborative solutions, and “birds of a feather” breakout discussions
  • 9 virtual video microscopy sessions
  • 8 session dedicated to laboratory professionals covering hematology, chemistry, microbiology, and blood banking
  • 6 resident board review sessions
  • 15 companion society sessions
  • 14 sessions related to wellness
  • 4 sessions discussing diversity and inclusion
  • 10 COVID-focused sessions
  • 20 grant funded sessions
  • 4 virtual patient symposia (more on this topic below…) and
  • And 300+ posters!
Image 2. More visual appreciation here: virtual sessions felt like you were really in a large, collective meeting of enthusiastic, like-minded laboratory professionals all learning, collaborating, and networking together!
Image 3. I was fortunate enough to to speak on this amazing panel regarding direct patient-and-pathologist interactions, making laboratory medicine and the overal healthcare experience, safer, more accessible, more interdisciplinary, and better equiped at dealing with the forefront of medical diagnostics!
Image 4. So, the session went well! Just look at that social media data: 36 million impressions over 3.5 days! That’s 1 million people engaging ASCP topics a day, or 12 people per second! All actively discussing and collaborating topics in pathology and laboratory medicine.
Image 5. How could I (of all people) ignore the fact that #ASCP2020 featured an amazing social (media) lounge where people from all over could connect, chat, network, and relax! There were interactive, virtual sessions covering all kinds of non-lab med stuff: yoga, meditation, mixology, and cooking! I hope this is a permanent addition to future (hopefully) hybrid in-person/virtual meetings.

What more could you ask for? The folks that run the logistics and planning for the ASCP Annual Meeting outdid themselves again. Sure this content would excite anyone in the field for 3 dedicated days of immersive learning and networking, but all this and more are still available online for virtual on-demand recorded viewing! Missed a session? No worries, it’s still waiting for you for about 6 months (through March of 2021). All the buzz aside from ASCP members having free access to all of this content, the excitement started months before the meeting went live. Estimates are still coming in, but membership grew by a couple hundred in the weeks leading up to the meeting—not surprising: free access for members? That was an excellent deal, so choice.

Image 6. The start of the #ASCPSoMeTeam’s amazing trajectory culminated at #ASCP2019 in Arizona, the more we work together the more we can accomplish for our profession and our patients, #StrongerTogether.
Image 7. ASCP’s Resident & Pathologist Councils are invaluable assets to promoting and advancing all of our professional development. #ASCP2020 was no different! From virtual fellowship fairs to online, interactive resident council sessions, there was a lot to take it—still available online!
Image 8. I’ve talked about previous ASCP Annual Meetings here and here, and while I can’t list every single aspect of what made this meeting (virtually) amazing, members can check in for about 6 months and see for themselves the quality and attention to detail that comes directly from our collective passion to make pathology and laboratory medicine better, for everyone. Kudos to the ASCP leadership and logistics teams that made this all possible!

Great to see you all at the meeting!

Thanks for reading! See you next time!


-Constantine E. Kanakis MD, MSc, MLS (ASCP)CM is a new first year resident physician in the Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Department at Loyola University Medical Center in Chicago with interests in hematopathology, transfusion medicine, bioethics, public health, and graphic medicine. His posts focus on the broader issues important to the practice of clinical laboratory medicine and their applications to global/public health, outreach/education, and advancing medical science. He is actively involved in public health and education, advocating for visibility and advancement of pathology and lab medicine. Watch his TEDx talk entitled “Unrecognizable Medicine” and follow him on Twitter @CEKanakisMD.

Doctors are Patients, Too

Hello again everyone, and welcome back!

Last time we talked a bit about what exactly pathology and laboratory medicine training looks like—a much-needed peek behind the curtain, if you ask me. This time, I’d like to discuss something that’s been challenging me way before I started working as a resident: something that’s made both clinical medicine and academic collaboration difficult (to say the least). I talk a lot about how medicine works best when we all come together and contribute our expertise from disciplines across the board for the sake of improving patient care; I even talk about how, too often, people don’t hear the messages coming through from their colleagues and that negatively impacts our field. We’re all guilty of it, some more than others. And in the last few weeks, I’ve been nearly deaf to my colleagues.

No literally, this article is about my Meniere’s disease and how those of us with invisible illness(es) can really impact the collaborative spirit of medical science. Trigger warning: frustration, anxiety, and pathology (mine, specifically). So here’s a reminder that everyone you meet and work alongside has issues they’re dealing or struggling with. And, to those outside of medicine, remember doctors are people too. Dr. Jena Martin, a dermatopathologist I admire and follow on social media recently promoted the topic #DoctorsArePatientsToo—she writes, shares, and promotes fantastic topics on social media and I suggest you check her content out at @jenamartinmd.

Image 1. By poet and patient Ronny Allen who was diagnosed with neuroendocrine cancer in July of 2010. He is passionate about education and awareness and advocates for patients everywhere. (Source: ronnyallan.com)

So, I’ve got a couple things to explain here. Come with me on a journey through the inner ear and out into the reaches of global pandemics!

An MD with MD

So what is Meniere’s disease (MD) and why does it deserve its own article? Well, first of all, it doesn’t deserve anything, it’s a garbage disorder with dumb symptoms and I’m only using it/myself as an example to highlight the struggle for other people working in medicine who also deal with invisible problems. But, since you asked…

Without belaboring any detail, Meniere’s is a somewhat understood inner ear disorder in which the potassium-rich, sound-signal inducing endolymphatic fluid builds up in the inner ear. This causes the organ of Corti (Image 2b) to swell up, along with the rest of the cochlea, the vestibule, and the fluid containing parts of the inner ear (Image 2a). The super pressurized vestibular-cochlear balloon is in a confined bone-space so what happens often is that small fistulas form, mixing the endo and perilymphatic fluids causing all sorts of problems not limited to but including: aural fullness, deafness, ridiculous multi-tonal/pulsatile tinnitus, distorted hearing, frequency loss, imbalance, severe peripheral/rotational vertigo lasting for hours, occasional tachycardia, anxiety, and more! There is no cure; therapy is symptom-dependent and purely aimed at management and mitigation of fulminant hearing loss. Did I mention that most times it’s one-sided, but mine is bilateral? Fun. I’ll be donating my ears to science and/or the garbage in some odd decades from now…

Image 2a and 2b. Dr. Strange-sound, or how I learned to stop worrying and love endolymph. Inner workings of the inner ear, note the marked swelling of fluid (hydrops) associated with the disease state compared to normal. (Sources: Nature and University of Iowa)

Let me put it this way: Over time, I will lose a stark majority of my natural hearing. I will continue to get occasional vertigo attacks, and related symptoms, until the disease (eventually…hopefully?) “burns out” and has no more capacity to damage any more already-damaged inner ear hair cells. I’ll probably get hearing aids or cochlear implants. (Whatever, I’ve always wanted to be half bionic…) I’ll probably keep a cane with me most times. (Dr. House anyone? Right? Or I could keep a sword in there? Legal issues?) But it’s not the long term that bothers me most. It’s the flare-ups. This disorder has periods of acute attacks, periods of mixed-symptom flare ups, and periods of remission. I can handle the remissions, hah. I can even handle the acute episodes—I’ve had great ENT colleagues and discovered great medication plans to manage the attacks. So that leaves the flares, which inspire writings like this one obviously. I wear my hearing aid, but it’s minimally helpful, and I practice patience until my hearing returns. But that isn’t as easy as it sounds, especially when you’re a working resident MD!

The Sound of Silence

Technically, I haven’t experienced true silence since 2015. And, during flare-ups, most of my hearing is almost entirely replaced by the only sound my ears can accommodate and attenuate for which is their own local vasculature. If Edgar Allan Poe could see me know…telltale ears, anyone? Let me paint a picture of what I’m hearing right now on a pretty rough flare-up day, at work, at my desk in the resident room. I’m drinking tea, I can’t hear myself swallowing. I monitor my heartrate on my watch and it’s about 80-90 beats per minute, in my ear, all day, whoosh-whoosh. The pot of tea the robots have been making, whistles non-stop, 24/7. The mosquitoes I’ve been writing about for years now on Lablogatory never leave my cochlea. Cool, on top of that I’ve got hearing loss and aural fullness that makes me not able to hear low-volume pages/phone rings (vibrate mode FTW) and most talking—especially behind masks. (I’ll get to that in a second.) If I turn my hearing aid too high, there’s a squeaky feedback explosion, not to mention the occasional adjustments for quiet and/or super loud talkers, yikes. Just overall, me no hear too good right now. Basically if hearing was reading text, the printer is out of toner and the paper is provolone cheese. And the cheese is on fire. Opa!

Image 3. My flaming-cheese metaphor captured, a xerox copy being made by a waiter in Chicago’s Greektown, the original home of the flaming-cheese saganaki dish. (Source: Chicago Sun Times)

Global Pandemic? Sounds Pretty Bad…

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has created very interesting situations at work and elsewhere, all over the globe. People are utilizing the most effective measure against spreading the illness: which up to this point is the non-pharmaceutical intervention of social distancing. Nearly every single person working today, in any field, doing anything, reading this blog, has been a part of email chains, and conference calls, and …. sigh… Zoom meetings. I know, I know… there are pro’s and con’s to this but consider these three points for those with #InvisibleIlnesses:

  1. Working from home has liberated chronically ill folks

Okay so I have an intermittent vestibular/cochlear disorder. What about folks with chronic pain, or Lyme-sequelae, or brain fog, or any other host of hurdles before they can jump onto a video call. Pretend you’re sick at home with a (non-COVID) viral bug. Can you imagine how nice it would feel to have hot tea, your medications, your cat, your spouse, and (most importantly) your couch/bed/TV nearby? Within reason, you’ve just given people who would have needed to excuse themselves a way to participate productively!

2. Imagine having a supplementary PowerPoint or chat box during conversations IRL

One of my specific challenges is missing a word here, a sentence there, and not being able to catch up in a conversation. Usually it ends up with my smile-nodding through to the next topic or checkpoint, but in the current age of virtual meetings I can un-obtrusively ask “What was that last bit?” without seeming like I tuned out. And bonus: I can often get a text translation of a point or two I might have missed from keen colleagues aware of my AV troubles. I can only imagine what it would be like for those more permanently affected.

3. The explosion of inclusivity and accessibility is remarkable

Speaking of which, the number of videos and presentations I am now seeing with closed captions/text supplements are astounding. Usually when I’m in the midst of a flare, I have to check out from audiovisual stimuli and stick to reading only. This can be quite the challenge for work sometimes. But with chat boxes and videos with captions, I feel like I can catch right up. Now, I said I’m only like this part of the time, so for those that have felt excluded and marginalized I’m happy to say that inclusivity and accessibility are growing. I’ve often thought that the importance of a news story or press conference could be measured by the presence or absence of a sign-language interpreter. Over 100 press conferences by Governor Andrew Cuomo in NY, or in Chicago, Illinois with Governor JB Pritzker and Mayor Lori Lightfoot, and each of them was accompanied by ASL accessibility. Fantastic! Just look at one of many efforts online, like @ProjectHearing on Instagram, which promotes the advancement of these topics every day!

Image 4. “Deaf people problems” is a meme collection I’ve seen over and over on social media. Awareness, check. Clear message, check. Super creative visual way to demonstrate a better version of my flaming cheese analogy, super check.
Image 5. Don’t tell anyone, but sometimes, I’m literally stuck on mute. Video conferences might become the new normal. If they are, remember to speak clearly and keep things out of the way between your talking and your microphone. Consider captions for videos and make nice PowerPoints. Please, haha.

Your Lips Move but I Can’t Hear What You’re Saying

So why, when the world is literally aflame with a viral pandemic, am I drudging you through my rant against my inner ears? And why did I just commit the travesty of endorsing zoom calls and captions (I know some people hate captions—you came for a movie not a book, I get it).

Well this whole topic illustrates to big things about working both as a physician and as a person with an invisible condition. First, like most things in medicine, to achieve success you have to adapt, improvise, and overcome. Solving patients’ problems and advocating for their best outcomes takes a little finessing of the system sometimes, you’ve got to do the same thing for yourself. Second, since doctors are patients too, its okay to ask for help. I matched with some of the best residents I’ve ever met, and they’ve offered whatever they can in helping manage my flares during work. This includes anything from extra emails/group text notification chains, forwarding pages, translating video call jumbled audio, etc. They are the best!

Meniere’s has been a challenge to me for a couple of years now, and it’s something I deal with. We’ll call it a character-building attribute. But I genuinely did worry about how this was going to affect me during residency—I had my fair share of hard days in med school basic sciences, and plenty of attending wave-offs when I simply couldn’t hear on 4:00am rounds (yeah I’m looking at you OBGYN and Surgery…). But, it’s been good.

Image 6. Not a new Arnold Schwarzenegger movie, these are real and they’re incredible. Clear window facemasks are such a relief for me. I give ones to all the folks I work with and my life just got easier.

And more than just good, another resident actually has a more permanent hearing impairment and two desks over from mine are the embedded hearing interpreters provided by the department. They’ve been so friendly and provided my with so many resources that I couldn’t be more appreciative. Not only do I have another resident to confide hearing-related rants to, but I also have a department that cares enough to create a supportive and accessible environment. One of the best things they’ve provided: MASKS WITH WINDOWS! Because since this damn pandemic started, I can’t read lips anymore! I didn’t realize how much I depended on visual lip-reads to confirm my hearing that it’s been a learning curve to say the least. Imagine being mostly deaf, your hearing aid not helping much, and looking into a multi-headed scope while your attending lectures on what you’re looking at. An otherwise impossible situation, but my friends and colleagues find ways to make it work because when one person excels, we all do. I’ve been able to continue working, learning, and collaborating thanks to considerations for invisible illnesses like mine.

Consider your colleagues, what can you do to make sure they feel that their needs are met since #DoctorsArePatientsToo? See you next time!


-Constantine E. Kanakis MD, MSc, MLS (ASCP)CM is a new first year resident physician in the Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Department at Loyola University Medical Center in Chicago with interests in hematopathology, transfusion medicine, bioethics, public health, and graphic medicine. His posts focus on the broader issues important to the practice of clinical laboratory medicine and their applications to global/public health, outreach/education, and advancing medical science. He is actively involved in public health and education, advocating for visibility and advancement of pathology and lab medicine. Watch his TEDx talk entitled “Unrecognizable Medicine” and follow him on Twitter @CEKanakisMD.

Dr. Who?

Welcome back everyone!

Thanks for reading my piece last month on liquid biopsies. And, as a side note, there is a growing number of awesome quality content and posts from pandemic response, to inclusion, alongside COVID and case-studies so subscribe, share, and add this page to your bookmarks—STAT! Lablogatory has been a fantastic platform to share and learn so much in this past year, I could barely keep up!

Or super-STAT if you’re one of those people…but hey, that language belongs to all of us! Lab professionals, nurses, scientists, and doctors alike. And this month, I just want to take a quick moment to celebrate a milestone.

I’m officially a resident physician/trainee, medical post-graduate! (There was confetti falling just now on my end, not sure about yours, but work with me here.) It’s just one of those life-goals that feels great when you get there. But there’s a lot more to it than it seems…if I told you being a pathology resident means sacrificing early adulthood, amassing soul-crushing debt, and explaining to your peers and colleagues what it is exactly you do and why you also bear the moniker of “physician,” you’d delete that bookmarked webpage faster than I can make you scroll through this thing.

(oh good you’re still here!)

All that said, I’ve got to say: it’s worth every single bit of it. Times a million. But I really did mention some red flags that, were we discussing any other work environment, would make you definitely think twice before committing 5-10 years of your life. Furthermore, as a PGY-1 in pathology, I could stand next to any other patient-facing PGY-1 colleague (read: intern) and they wouldn’t have the faintest about what I actually do. Listen, the “lifestyle” specialty, generally 9-5er, no weekend, no 24hr call isn’t something I’m shy to celebrate, but it’s not the whole story. I’ve matched and started learning and working at a great institution with great faculty, mentors, and other residents/fellows. Bottom line: I’m more than a little happy about where I’m at professionally.

Image 1. Most path & lab med residents get cubicle-style desks to spend time reading, prepping, writing, learning, and previewing cases between responsibilities in sign-outs, tumor boards, or OR/gross room work. Most of my non-path friends don’t like this. It makes me very happy.

So, to my non-pathology friends, what is it exactly that I do during my residency training while you might be busy rounding, managing glucose levels, triaging cases, putting orders in—you know, regular intern stuff *shudders* … (pathology trainees don’t have an intern year, we jump right into the specialty and go for 3-4 straight on through). Like most of you I have a transition period where I get acclimated to the workload and patterns of my specific residency, but sans-anno-interna, I’ve got lots of work ahead to climb the steep learning curve that med school pathology merely skims.

What does non-patient-facing mean, exactly?

Well, without an intern year you jump right into what most path residents go into which is a 4-year combined anatomic and clinical pathology (AP/CP) track. You immediately begin training in all the fields in pathology. They include surgical pathology (of various sub specialties like head-and-neck, gynecologic, gastrointestinal, thoracic, neuro, etc.—think surgery, then add pathology), autopsy training, dermatopathology, cytopathology, hematopathology, transfusion medicine, clinical chemistry, microbiology, hemostasis and coagulopathy, pediatric pathology, forensic pathology, molecular, training as a laboratory director, and much, much more. Each of these services has a workload which is usually comprised of cases from biopsies and grossed specimens for histologic analysis (anatomic pathology) or the ongoing maintenance and advancement of clinical diagnostic testing through laboratory methods and management of staff/resources (clinical pathology).

Image 2. August 2019 Issue of The Pathologist magazine. Pathologists, medical students, microscopes, you get it…Specifically, that’s one of my mentors (and now faculty) Dr. Kamran Mirza and (then) medical student Austin McHenry discussing the critical role pathology plays in every circle of medical care.

When I say “non-patient facing” this means that the majority of that work is not done in 1-on-1 settings with patients in a clinic or hospital floor. It is done ancillary to their clinical experience whereby pathology attendings manage the simultaneous training of residents and processing of case sign outs for rapid and accurate diagnostic output for our patient-facing colleagues. For example, while a patient, their family, and doctor are discussing and managing symptoms related to a possible cancer diagnosis. The pathologists are examining microscopic behavior of the cancer-in-question’s cells and adding immunohistochemical testing and molecular analyses to identify, stage, and prognosticate that cancer. Returning information about what it is and what can be done back to the patient-facing clinician, who can then best-translate a tailored approach for their patient. Old-timey medical texts would often refer to the pathologist as the “doctors’ doctor,” and I’m not here to hate on that haha. My clinical friends and readers might feel forlorn now at the prospect of 4 years of medical school training to “just look into a microscope all day?” Well, for some folks in path it means a lot more than that, every slide is a patient. So we care just as much as if they were right opposite our desk. But that’s not all we do…

(More on that in a minute.)

So What Do You Do?

Okay, there are lot of words in path that might act as a barrier to understanding the common ground between me and …let’s say a colleague and friend in Family Medicine. So for the purposes of transparency here’s my friend from medical school Dr. Danash Raja and how a small part of his schedule and my schedule aren’t so different…

Image 3. Dr. Raja is from Alaska, and now works as a resident physician in Family Medicine in Eu Claire, Wisconsin! Alaska! Look at this graduation photo!

On both sides of this table are clinicians managing their patients and ensuring the best possible outcomes. Both sides are deeply vested in intensive hours of training, procedural experience, evidence-based best-practices from the literature, and ongoing continuing education.

Image 4. They see me grossin’, they hatin’…A lot of surgical pathology and microscopy in general revolves around understanding the gross layout of a specimen and its orientation before it becomes a thin microscope slide. As a junior pathology resident, we spend a lot of time up near the OR. Critical skill for a crucial foundation of knowledge.

Literally the biggest differences:

  • In pathology, I get my own desk space and I need it! I’ve got to start amassing a physical and digital library to supplement the next 4-6 years of subspecialty training for the eventual day when a colleague will see me in an elevator and expect concise, thorough, and actionable material to inform their clinical management from the pathologic diagnosis.
  • Pathology residents and clinical residents both take “call” except Dr. Raja has to pull grueling 24-hour+ shifts and stay in the hospital for the duration, and I answered a page about a transfusion reaction from a grocery store once.
  • When a patient thinks about the person who helped them find out what kind of cancer they had and what treatment to begin, they’ll probably think of Dr. Raja or someone patient-facing in Heme/Onc—but I’m working on this, every day!

Bottom line: I’m as important as he is, and he is as important as I am. Our work is what really matters, and what really connects us as clinical colleagues. It’s all about patients, remember? But I’m more than happy to be the pathologist to his patient-facing, diabetes-managing, vaccine-giving, life-improving super hero doctor!

You Never See Patients?

We’re back on this. Remember how I said looking into microscopes isn’t all we do? Okay, well it’s not. And if you’re lucky enough to have matched to as awesome of a place as I did, then you know what I’m talking about. If you’ve read some of my pieces, you know full well my passion in pathology lies in Hematopathology and Transfusion Medicine. I like to sit right on the fence between AP and CP, and mostly look at the green grass on the CP yard. This month, I’ve been on service for Transfusion Medicine and let me tell you about the few weeks…

Image 5. Dr. Kimberly Sanford, ASCP leadership and Director of Transfusion Medicine at VCU was highlighted in The Pathologist magazine for her work outside the laboratory seeing patients every day, and encouraging residents to do the same and do what pathologists do best: enrich and improve the channels of communication so patients better understand their conditions and the medical process.

I, a pathologist trainee, resident physician, under the supervision of two attending physician pathologists have been seeing and following up on patients nearly every day. Gasp! No, I’m not part of some backwards resident exchange program (because OMG how dangerous haha), no I’m not lost, no I’m not being overly gunnery, that’s it, that’s the Tweet. Seriously, it’s just part of the service. Larger academic hospitals with robust clinical blood bank services often have apheresis clinics and I find myself working exactly there. Blood bank/Transfusion Medicine is one of those subspecialties where patient contact is part of the routine. At some institutions, I’ve been a part of some pathology-led teams that procure the bone marrow aspirates from their patients in Hemepath service, or conducted their own fine needle aspirations for cytology service, or dermpath services that operate in clinics alongside their dermatology colleagues—I’ve even been working on frozen sections and surgical path grossing when called into an operating room to discuss methods and approach for biopsy! There were patients at every turn, all with pathologists on the front line! Dr. Syed T. Hoda (@01sth02 on Twitter) from NYU Langone often says, “Person FIRST, doctor SECOND, specialist THIRD.” And trust him, he’s a bone and soft tissue pathologist that left the lab and went to the floors to help clinical staff when overwhelmed during the peak of the COVID crisis in NYC. So for my dual-interests, I would say I’d expect to see quite a bit of patients in my future practice.

Image 6. My awesome co-residents! (Left-to-right): me, Dr. Elnaz Panah, Dr. Aayushma Regmi, and Dr. Sandra Haddad—you’re going to hear more about them, don’t worry.

So, would I pick pathology again? Uh, yeah! Without a single hesitation. Every day at work I am reminded that I am at the right place, with the right co-residents, the right faculty and mentorship, and the right environment to train and hone my future skills for a career that lines up exactly with what I want to do.If you’re interested about the intersections between clinical medicine and pathology, and want to learn more about “patient-facing pathology” keep an eye out during the 2020 ASCP Annual Meeting for a talk by yours truly as part of a panel discussion on communicating directly with patients! Register now! Free for members.

See you next time!

BONUS: did you notice that I referenced The Pathologist magazine a bit in this post, well it’s because they named me to their Pathology Power List for 2020! An exclusive, international list of 80 professionals in the field of pathology and laboratory medicine who contribute and advance the profession every day! I was highlighted for my active social media work and my response to the early COVID pandemic in Manhattan, NY.


-Constantine E. Kanakis MD, MSc, MLS (ASCP)CM is a new first year resident physician in the Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Department at Loyola University Medical Center in Chicago with interests in hematopathology, transfusion medicine, bioethics, public health, and graphic medicine. His posts focus on the broader issues important to the practice of clinical laboratory medicine and their applications to global/public health, outreach/education, and advancing medical science. He is actively involved in public health and education, advocating for visibility and advancement of pathology and lab medicine. Watch his TEDx talk entitled “Unrecognizable Medicine” and follow him on Twitter @CEKanakisMD.

Making Meetings Matter

Hello again everyone!

I’m writing to you now back in Manhattan after visiting sunny Phoenix, AZ for this year’s ASCP Annual Meeting. Last month I talked about downtime, pathology emergencies, and introduced you all to our insightful and dynamic colleague, Jalissa Hall. It was great working with her and one of the last things we talked about was getting to go to professional society meetings. We also talked about the upcoming meeting next year in Austin, TX! And that’s exactly what I’d like to talk about with you this time: why going to meetings like ASCP is not only educational, but an excellent way to network with your laboratorian peers from around the country.

Image 1a. My wife and I made it to the Phoenix Hyatt Regency on registration day! ASCP swag on, obviously.
Image 1b. Behind the Scenes – Hosting the ASCP 2019 Facebook Live broadcast with two fantastic colleagues, Dr. K. Mirza and Dr. A. Booth! Did you catch us? But more about social media later…

I couldn’t go to every single session—there’s just too many—but I did learn so much valuable, practical information at the educational sessions. Here are just a mere few insights from the long list of fantastic speakers I had the chance to visit!

I participated in an interactive session on the ASCP/CAP/ASH guidelines for lymphoma workup…

Figure 1. All the multidisciplinary expertise must go through rigorous adjustment and evaluation all the way throughout the process of seeking out and publishing proper guidelines. (Source: ASCP 2019 session 5007-19; Kroft, S., Sever, C., and Cheung, M.)

Drs. Kroft, Sever, and Cheung discussed updates from the WHO 2016 guidelines as well as relating any changes in concurrent literature to appropriate diagnostic accuracy with evidence-based guidelines. If it sounds familiar, it’s because I talked about these guidelines a few months ago! In my month clerkship at The Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN I presented a therapy-related AML case in the setting of Li-Fraumeni disorder. In my discussion I stressed the utility and importance of having organized and algorithmic guidelines to diagnose patients accurately, effectively, and timely. This time, instead of just talking about the guidelines, I got to listen to some of the folks who actually put them together—and, according to them, it’s no easy task!

I learned about culturally appropriate leadership training…

Figure 2. The panelists each had something insightful and moving to contribute to this wonderful discussion on female empowerment in our profession, and ultimately how it relates to improving patient care! (Source: ASCP 2019 session 8012-19; Mulder, L., Upton, M., Vuhahula, E., Abedl AlThagafi, M., Papas, F., and Sanford, K.)

This year’s ASCP president, Dr. Melissa Upton moderated this fantastic panel and opened with an old proverb: “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” This was definitely a theme for each of the mini-sessions’ discussions. ASCP’s own Lotte Mulder discussed her research on culturally applicable leadership training using her Leadership Institute Initiative. She talked about countries that are culturally different and developmentally different up and down the spectrum can all benefit from leadership development and opportunity. Next came Dr. Edda Vuhahula, an accomplished physician, educator, and advocate in Tanzania. She related her experiences of women in leadership roles, and challenges on the horizon as more women rise to these positions every day. Dr. Malak Abed AlThagafi talked about her “hats:” as an entrepreneur, a medical director, and a researcher in her whirlwind story of empowerment and accomplishment. Finally, medical laboratory scientist and former Philippine Army colonel, Filipinas Papas gave her personal perspectives on sexism, education, bias, and opportunity.

Celebrated my colleagues and my contributions to the 6th Choosing Wisely list of recommendations…

Figure 3. My totally biased favorite slide from Dr. Lee H. Hilbourne, chair of the ASCP Effective Test Utilization Steering Committee. It’s an honor to be included in this year’s list, alongside so many accomplished contributors.

The Choosing Wisely initiative, partnering with the American Board of Internal Medicine and many other specialty organizations, is one of my favorite programs at ASCP. To date, our lab medicine organization has the highest number of effective test utilization recommendations. ASCP seeks active contributions to our expanding lists of recommendations to eliminate wasteful, unnecessary testing and to improve patient outcomes. This talk was also a great opportunity to honor the ASCP 2019 Choosing Wisely Champions: Dr. Gary W. Procop from the Cleveland Clinic, Dr. Lucy Nam from the Inova Lab best practice team, and Dr. Alyssa Ziman from UCLA Health. Want to read the most updated list of recommendations ASCP made to the Choosing Wisely initiative?

Check it out here: https://www.ascp.org/content/docs/default-source/get-involved-pdfs/istp_choosingwisely/2019_ascp-30-things-list.pdf

I watched some cutting-edge exchanges about cellular therapy…

Image 2. Here I am with laboratorian S. Malakian and Dr. Gastineau with The Mayo Clinic after they discussed the future of complex cell therapies.

One really effective take-home message from this seminar was that, if we’re going to rely on cellular therapy in the future—especially as it relates to “individualized medicine”—then who do you think should be in charge? Who’s got the most experience and knowledge when it comes to cell storage, transfusion protocol, patient outcomes, and high reliability? Short answer: it’s us. Long answer: go back and check out a piece I wrote about high-stakes responsibility in and out of the lab!

Popped into fascinating hematologic cases at our neighboring SHEAHP2019 meeting…

Listen, I like hematopathology, I’ll be the first to tell you that. There were so many people giving presentations in this near standing-room-only meeting, that I recognized from papers, abstracts, and journals that I’ve read in the past year alone! There were so many interesting sessions at this meeting, I wish I could have seen more…

Image 3. Here’s Dr. J. Dalland from Mayo Clinic Pathology discussing a lymphoproliferative disorder with associated eosinophilia. These talks go deep into morphology and photypic patterns, so that Hemepath colleagues have a chance to assess their workup and protocols. It’s also great learning for avoiding pitfalls—this case shows architectural changes in lymph nodes which could cause someone to misdiagnose!

Learned how to create an impactful dialogue with patients directly…

What do you do as a pathologist when a patient wants to speak to you? Yes, you. Not a typo! This was the last talk I went to and it was a great way to close out this awesome conference.

Image 4. Me with (left to right) Dr. K. Sanford from VCU, Patient Champion Anthony Reed, Dr. M. Sitorius from the University of Nebraska, and M. Mitchell. All of these individuals had amazing things to say about bridging the gap between the bench and the bedside!

In their own ways these patient advocates demonstrated that if you want to represent our lab profession as one of accuracy, answers, and hope, we’ve got the skills and resources to do it! Dr. Sanford sees so many patients in her transfusion services and discusses their care plans regularly. Mr. Reed is an ASCP patient champion who, after being diagnosed with ESRD, became a learned lab ally. Dr. Sitorius is a family medicine physician at a pathology conference, talking about empathy and connection! Ms. Mitchell has done fantastic work with her pathology colleagues after beating cancer and fighting for patient education every day! These folks have taken our field of laboratory medicine to its outer edges, touching patients’ lives directly—and I left energized to take it further in the future.

And of course, I learned so much about the utilization of social media as a practical tool for education, advocacy, and outreach…

I can’t list every single session, lecture, keynote, presentation, or panel in this article. This was just a glimpse of what meetings like this have to offer. You will learn, obviously, but you’ll also gain access to new perspectives and meet people who reinvigorate your passion for your profession in ways you didn’t even consider. One of the most fulfilling experiences of this meeting was being on the ASCP Social Media Team! Posting to Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter with the hashtags #ASCP2019, #ASCPSoMeTeam, or the scavenger hunt #ASCPiSpy was a great way to bolster our enthusiastic network. This was my third ASCP Annual Meeting, and I met so many wonderful people I can’t wait for the next one! Here’s a few of my favorite snaps from the meeting:

Image 5. Here’s part of our amazing #SocialMediaTeam: (left to right) A. Odegard from Baptist Health, myself, Dr. S. Mukhopadhyay from the Cleveland Clinic, Dr. A. Booth from the University of Texas, and Dr. K. Mirza from Loyola Chicago!
Image 6. At my first ASCP meeting in California, Jeff Jacobs, ASCP’s Chief Science Officer, gave me some of the best advice for my own personal and professional growth, “Stay Humble” he told me. Nearly 5 years later, he added “Don’t Give Up” on goals, yourself, or anything in life. You can’t pick that up in a path review book. I feel lucky to know people like him.
Image 7. #SoMe FTW (Social Media for the win!) At this great talk, Dr. C. Arnold, Dr. L. Shirley, and Dr. D. Gray III, all from the Ohio State University discussed how to use social media to build a reputation and expand your impact as a pathologist, educator, and advocate!
Image 8: Conferences are a great time to run into old friends and colleagues whom you may have spent a month rotating with! If you read about my time at Danbury Hospital in Connecticut, Drs. O. Olayinka and G. Kuar were part of it and I’m glad to call them friends!
Image 9: Presented by the ASCP Resident and Pathologist Councils, this was a great networking session to discuss fellowships, employment, and how to plan for the first 100 days of working in laboratory medicine from PGY-1 and on! I certainly learned a lot!
Image 10: (left to right) Dr. K. Chaztopoulos from the Mayo Clinic, myself, and K.C. Booth, RN in front of his finalist poster in the scientific category! Another valuable professional connection and friend made through my experiences in laboratory medicine.
Image 11. When one of your mentors (Dr. K. Mirza) is signing copies of The Pathologist magazine that featured him on the cover, you get in line for one …obviously.
Image 12. Dr. M. Upton is an inspirational speaker and insightful individual both on stage and in person. She had words of encouragement for my upcoming residency interview season and made sure I felt I could rely on ASCP for whatever I needed professionally. Thank you, Dr. Upton!
Image 13. Some more colleagues from Mayo Clinic Pathology (left to right): Dr. A. Ravindran, Dr. D. Larson, Dr. J. Dalland, and myself. These folks were very busy with all the great hematology sessions at the SHEAHP2019 meeting.
Image 14: No ASCP Annual Meeting would be complete without the leadership, passion, and vision of our CEO Dr. Blair Holladay. He, his leadership team, and this organization have been integral in my path to pathology and I can’t wait to see what’s in store for the future!

Social media has become so valuable in our field. Not just for networking, but sharing cases, impressions, publications, and more! It’s so easy to rally behind a hashtag and support a cause in so many instances—why not in our profession? Get involved, be an active voice for your own practice as well as your colleagues.

If you want to learn more about the sessions you may have missed, download the ASCP2019 app from the Apple App Store or Google App Store!

Thanks for reading! See you on social media, because when we communicate and collaborate, we are #StrongerTogether! I’m on twitter at @CKanakis, until next time!

–Constantine E. Kanakis MSc, MLS (ASCP)CM graduated from Loyola University Chicago with a BS in Molecular Biology and Bioethics and then Rush University with an MS in Medical Laboratory Science. He is currently a medical student actively involved in public health and laboratory medicine, conducting clinicals at Bronx-Care Hospital Center in New York City.

Surgical Pathology Case Study: A 2.5 Year Old Male Who Presents with Jaundice and Pruritus

Case History

The patient is a 2.5 year old male who is being evaluated for a liver transplant versus biliary diversion surgery. The patient was born at 2 kilograms and went home with mom one week after birth. The patient was readmitted back to the hospital for evaluation of jaundice and since then the patient has been intermittently hospitalized for episodes of worsening jaundice, acholic stools, scleral icterus, and pruritus. At 5 months of age, the patient was diagnosed with progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis, type 2, and was placed on the liver transplant list. As a result of the liver failure, the patient has developed coagulopathy, hypocalcemia resulting in seizures, and pruritus. The family history is significant for no known congenital liver diseases.

Table 1. Pertinent lab findings.

The father was worked up for living donation and was found to be a suitable donor, and is donating the left lateral segment of his liver.

Diagnosis

Received in the Surgical Pathology laboratory is a 700 gm, 23.5 x 14.5 x 3.5 cm explanted liver with an attached 4.5 x 1.2 x 0.4 cm gallbladder. The liver specimen has a smooth, green-red liver capsule without any grossly identifiable nodules or lesions (Image 1). The gallbladder has a yellow-pink external surface and is opened to reveal a 1.5 x 0.7 x 0.4 cm dark brown stone with a small amount of brown-yellow bile fluid. The liver is sectioned to reveal a smooth green-red cut surface (Image 2). No lesions are identified and minimal hilar structures are included with the specimen. Portions of the specimen have been taken for electron microscopy and frozen for future diagnostic purposes. Submitted sections include:

Cassette 1 and 2:   Hilar structures

Cassettes 3-15:   Representative sections of liver parenchyma

Cassette 16:   representative section of gallbladder

Image 1. Posterior aspect of green-tinged liver
Image 2. Cut section of liver

On microscopy, the trichrome stain highlights the presence of portal and centrilobular fibrosis, with focal bridging. However, regenerative nodule formation is not evident. The portal tracts contain sparse mononuclear cell infiltrates. Significant bile ductular proliferation is also evident, as confirmed by a CK7 immunostain. However, the native bile ducts appear unremarkable. There is also considerable hepatocellular and canalicular cholestasis in the centrilobular regions. Occasional multinucleated hepatocytes are also seen within the centrolobular zones. No steatosis is evident.

This constellation of histologic features is consistent with the clinical history of progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis, type II.

Discussion

Progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis (PFIC) is a group of autosomal recessive disorders that affects bile formation and results in cholestasis of the liver, usually beginning in infancy and childhood. There are three types of PFIC, each related to a mutation in the liver transport system genes that are involved in bile formation. PFIC type 1 (PFIC1), which is also referred to as Byler disease, is due to impaired bile salt secretion related to a ATP8B1 gene that encodes the FIC1 protein. PFIC type 2 (PFIC2), which is referred to as Byler syndrome, is due to impaired bile salt secretion (similar to type 1), but is related to the ABCB11 gene that encodes the bile salt export pump, or BSEP. PFIC type 3 (PFIC3) is due to impaired biliary phospholipid secretion that is related to a defect in the ABCB4 gene that encodes the multi-drug resistant 3 protein, or MDR3.

PFIC is suspected to be the cause of cholestasis in 10-15% of children, and is also the underlying cause of liver transplants in 10-15% of children. The exact prevalence remains unknown, but is estimated to be between 1 in every 50,000-100,000 births. PFIC1 and PFIC2 account for 2/3 of all PFIC cases, with PFIC3 making up the other 1/3. PFIC is present worldwide, and there does not appear to be a gender predilection.

The main clinical manifestation in all forms of PFIC, hence the name, is cholestasis, and will usually appear in the first few months of life with PFIC1 and PFIC2. Recurring episodes of jaundice are also present in PFIC1, whereas permanent jaundice and a rapid evolution to liver failure are characteristic of PFIC2. In PFIC3, cholestasis is noted within the first year of life in 1/3 of all cases, but rarely will be present in the neonatal period. PFIC3 can also present later in infancy, childhood or even early adulthood, with gastrointestinal bleeding due to portal hypertension and cirrhosis being the main symptoms that the patient would present with. Pruritus is severe in PFIC 1 and 2, but has a more mild presentation in PFIC3. There have been multiple cases reported of hepatocellular carcinoma that are associated with PFIC2, but there so far have not been any cases of hepatocellular carcinoma reported that are associated with PFIC3. Other signs and symptoms that may be present in PFIC1 include short stature, deafness, diarrhea, pancreatitis and liver steatosis. When examining clinical laboratory results, patients with PFIC1 and PFIC 2 will have normal serum gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT) levels, but patients with PFIC3 will have elevated GGT levels. PFIC1 and PFIC2 can be differentiated from each other by the higher transaminase and alpha-fetoprotein levels that are found in PFIC2. When analyzing the biliary bile salt concentrations, PFIC1 will have mildly decreased levels (3-8 mM), PFIC2 will have drastically decreased levels (<1 mM), and PFIC3 will have normal levels. In addition, the biliary bile salt:phospholipid ratio and the cholesterol:phospholipid ratio will be approximately 5 times higher in PFIC3 than in normal bile, due to the biliary phospholipid levels being dramatically decreased (normal phospholipid range = 19-24%, PFIC phospholipid range = 1-15%).

Histologically, PFIC1 and PFIC 2 will have canalicular cholestasis, an absence of true ductular proliferation, and periportal biliary metaplasia of the hepatocytes. In PFIC2, these manifestations are much more worrisome with more marked lobular and portal fibrosis, and inflammation, as well as having much more pronounced necrosis and giant cell transformation (Images 3 and 4). PFIC3 will show portal fibrosis and true ductal proliferation, with a mixed inflammatory infiltrate. In addition, cholestasis can be present in the lobule and in some of the ductules that contain bile plugs. Cytokeratin staining can help confirm the ductular proliferation within the portal tract. Mild or absent canalicular staining with BSEP and MDR3 antibodies will help to diagnose PFIC2 and PFIC3, respectively.

Image 3. Photomicrograph demonstrating cholestasis, centrilobular necrosis, lobular inflammation, and giant cells (H&E)
Image 4. Photomicrograph demonstrating portal, centrilobular and bridging fibrosis (Trichrome)

A diagnosis of PFIC is based on the clinical manifestations, liver ultrasonography, cholangiography and liver histology, as well as on specific tests for excluding other causes of childhood cholestasis (such as biliary atresia, Alagille syndrome, cystic fibrosis and alpha-1 antitrypsine deficiency). Ultrasonography of the liver will be normal with the exception of a possible dilated gallbladder. At the time of the liver biopsy, a portion of tissue can be submitted for electron microscopy, which in the case of PFIC, can show canalicular dilatation, microvilli loss, abnormal mitochondrial internal structures, and varying intra-canalicular accumulations of bile. PFIC1 will have coarsely, granular bile on electron microscopy, whereas PFIC2 will have a more amorphous appearance. If biliary obstruction is noted on the liver biopsy, a cholangiography will need to be performed to exclude sclerosing cholangitis. If a normal biliary tree is observed, as in PFIC, bile can be collected for biliary bile salt analysis (which was discussed earlier in the laboratory results section). Differentiating between PFIC1, PFIC2 and PFIC3 can be quite troublesome, but luckily Davit-Spraul, Gonzales, Baussan and Jacquemin proposed a fantastic schematic for the clinical diagnosis of PFIC, which is presented as Figure 1.

Figure 1. Schematic proposed for the clinical diagnosis of progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis

Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) therapy should be considered in all patients with PFIC to prevent liver damage and provide relief from pruritus. Rifampicin and Cholestyramine can help in cases of PFIC3, but have been found to provide no improvement in PFIC1 or PFIC2. In some PFIC1 or PFIC2 patients, biliary diversion can also relieve pruritus and slow disease progression. The total caloric intake should be around 125% of the recommended daily allowance. Dietary fats should come in the form of medium chain triglycerides, and care should be taken to check the patient’s vitamin levels to look for signs of vitamin deficiency. Patients with PFIC2 should be monitored for hepatocellular carcinoma, beginning from the first year of life. Ultimately, most PFIC patients develop fibrosis and end-stage liver disease before adulthood, and are candidates for liver transplantation. Diarrhea, steatosis and short stature may not improve after liver transplantation, and could become aggravated from the procedure. Hepatocyte transplantation, gene therapy or specific targeted pharmacotherapy are possible alternative therapies for PFIC, but will require more research and studies to determine whether they are viable options.

References

  1. Davit-Spraul A, Gonzales E, Baussan C, Jacquemin E. Progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2009;4(1). doi:10.1186/1750-1172-4-1
  2. Evason K, Bove KE, Finegold MJ, et al. Morphologic findings in progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis 2 (PFIC2): correlation with genetic and immunohistochemical studies. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011;35(5):687–696. doi:10.1097/PAS.0b013e318212ec87
  3. Srivastava A. Progressive Familial Intrahepatic Cholestasis. J Clin Exp Hepatol. 2013;4(1):25-36. doi: 10.1016/j.jceh.2013.10.005

-Cory Nash is a board certified Pathologists’ Assistant, specializing in surgical and gross pathology. He currently works as a Pathologists’ Assistant at the University of Chicago Medical Center. His job involves the macroscopic examination, dissection and tissue submission of surgical specimens, ranging from biopsies to multi-organ resections. Cory has a special interest in head and neck pathology, as well as bone and soft tissue pathology. Cory can be followed on twitter at @iplaywithorgans.

Surgical Pathology Case Study: A 63 Year Old Male with a ~60 Year Recurring Neck Mass

Case History

A 63 year old man presented with a long standing history of a recurring pleomorphic adenoma of the parotid gland. As a child, the patient had radiotherapy to the bilateral parotid glands for parotid swelling. He then developed a left parotid mass ~15 years later and underwent parotidectomy. After another recurrence ~15 years after the initial parotidectomy, he underwent a second resection of multiple masses in the preauricular region. The patient then developed a recurrence ~20 years after the second resection and underwent neutron beam therapy. The patient tolerated the treatment well noting mild dry mouth, which is persistent, and left ear pain, but otherwise has no major long-term sequelae from the treatment. Eighteen years after the neutron beam therapy, the patient developed a left submandibular mass. A subsequent biopsy of the mass revealed a pleomorphic adenoma.  Enlarged left and right submental and submandibular nodes were noted, with biopsies performed at an outside hospital of these nodes demonstrating metastatic poorly differentiated carcinoma within three lymph nodes. It was noted on this pathology report that the histological features, in light of the history, could represent a carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma. A CT scan of the head and neck revealed a large multiloculated, cystic, rim-enhancing mass within the left parotid gland, as well as large enhancing lymph nodes within the right anterior and posterior cervical triangle and the right submandibular space, the largest of which measured 2.1 cm. A PET scan showed increased activity within the right neck. Upon meeting with otolaryngology, a 4.0 x 7.0 cm lobular, non-fixed left parotid mass, and two level 1B right sided nodes, were palpated. Based on the patient’s history, physical exam, and prior biopsy results, it was decided to proceed with a parotidectomy and bilateral neck dissection. 

Diagnosis

Received in the Surgical Pathology laboratory is a soft tissue mass resection from the area of the left parotid gland measuring 9.0 x 6.0 x 4.2 cm. The specimen is oriented by a single long stitch designating the superior aspect, and a double long stitch designating the lateral aspect (Figure 1). The specimen is entirely inked black, and then bisected to reveal multiple discrete, white-tan, partially cystic masses ranging in size from 0.2-4.0 cm in greatest dimension and measuring 7.0 x 3.5 x 3.0 cm in aggregate dimension (Figure 2). The largest mass is partially cystic with the cystic component measuring 1.2 cm in greatest dimension. This largest mass abuts the anterior, medial and lateral margins. The remaining tumor deposits are located:

– 1.2 cm from the inferior margin

– 0.4 cm from the superior margin

– 0.9 cm from the posterior margin

No gross salivary gland tissue is identified. The remainder of the specimen consists of unremarkable yellow adipose tissue and red-brown skeletal muscle. The specimen is submitted as follows.

Cassette 1:   superior margin

Cassette 2:   representative sections of anterior margin

Cassette 3:   anterior superior margin

Cassette 4:   anterior inferior margin

Cassette 5:   posterior margin

Cassette 6-9:   representative sections of mass with approach to lateral margin

Cassette 10:   representative sections of mass with approach to medial margin

Cassette 11:   mass in relation to surrounding skeletal muscle

Cassette12-15:   representative sections of mass

On microscopy, the specimen contains nests of tumor cells ranging in size from 0.2 to 4.0 cm within a dense fibrous matrix. Although these deposits may represent lymph node metastases, no residual lymphoid tissue is present. The tumor is represented by residual pleomorphic adenoma and numerous soft tissue deposits of pleomorphic adenoma (Figure 3). Admixed are broad areas of high grade carcinoma with necrosis (Figure 4). Most regions show adenocarcinoma, although a rare focus of squamous differentiation is also present. The lateral margin is positive for carcinoma, and a pleomorphic adenoma component approaches within 0.1 cm of the medial margin. The anterior, posterior, inferior, and superior margins are all free of tumor. No salivary gland tissue is identified.

In addition, eleven frozen sections are submitted from various areas surrounding the mass, with five of the eleven frozen sections demonstrating tumor deposits. A right neck dissection is performed with following results:

Level IB: 2 of 3 positive (largest deposit: 1.8 cm)

Level II and III: 1 of 14 positive, Level II (1.9cm)

Level IV: 1 of 8 positive (2.0 cm)

Based on these results, the specimen was signed out as carcinoma ex-pleomorphic adenoma, and designated as pT4aN2cMx

Figure 3. 2x photomicrograph showing a classic appearing pleomorphic adenoma with satellite nodules along the periphery

Discussion

Carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma (CXPA) is a carcinoma that arises in a primary (de novo) or recurrent benign pleomorphic adenoma (PA). While a PA is the most common salivary gland tumor, accounting for approximately 80% of all benign salivary gland tumors, a CXPA is quite uncommon, accounting for only 3.6% of all salivary gland tumors. CXPA is predominantly found in the sixth to eighth decades of life, with a slight predilection for females. CXPA arises most commonly in the salivary glands, in particular the parotid and the submandibular glands. CXPA can also arise in the minor salivary glands in the oral cavity, although these tumors tend to be smaller than their counterparts in the parotid and submandibular gland. There have also been cases of CXPA in the breast, lacrimal gland, trachea, and nasal cavity.

Clinically, CXPA presents as a firm, asymptomatic mass that can go undetected for years since they are not generally invasive. When the patient does experience any symptoms, with pain being the most common, it is usually due to the mass extending to adjacent structures. If the mass was to involve the facial nerve, paresis or palsy can occur. Other signs and symptoms include skin ulceration, mass enlargement, skin fixation, lymphadenopathy, dental pain, and dysphagia. The onset of symptoms can range anywhere from 1 month up to 60 years (such as with this case), with a mean onset of 9 years. Half of patients will have a painless mass for less than 1 year. Since these symptoms are similar to those of a benign PA, it’s important that the treating physician be aware of the possibility of a CXPA, especially considering the rarity of the cancer.

Grossly, CXPA appears as a firm, ill-defined tumor, and can vary greatly depending on the predominant component. If the PA is the predominant component, the mass may appear gray-blue and translucent, and it could be possible to grossly differentiate between the PA areas and the CXPA areas. If the malignant component predominates, then the mass may contain cystic, hemorrhagic and necrotic areas.

Microscopically, CXPA is defined as having a mixture of a benign PA, admixed with carcinomatous components. Zbaren et al, in an analysis of 19 CXPA cases, found 21% of the tumors were composed of less than 33% carcinoma, 37% of the tumors were composed of 33-66% carcinoma, and 42% of the tumors were composed of greater than 66% carcinoma. Most often, the malignant component is adenocarcinoma, but can also include adenoid cystic carcinoma, mucoepidermoid carcinoma, salivary duct carcinoma, and other less common variations. In cases where the entire tumor is replaced by carcinoma, the diagnosis of CXPA will be based on the presence of a PA on the previous biopsy. Conversely, you could also have a tumor that is predominately composed of a PA, with sparse areas of malignant transformation, such as nuclear pleomorphism, atypical mitotic figures, hemorrhage and necrosis. The likelihood of malignant transformation increases with the length of the PA being present, from 1.5% at 5 years, up to 10% after 15 years.

CXPA can be further sub-divided into four categories based on the extent of invasion of the carcinomatous component outside the capsule: in-situ, non-invasive, minimally invasive, and invasive carcinoma.

#1) In-situ carcinoma occurs when nuclear pleomorphism and atypical mitotic figures are found within the epithelial cells, but do not extend out beyond the border of the myoepithelial cells (Figure 5).

#2) Non-invasive CXPA, which can include in-situ carcinoma, is maintained within the fibrous capsule of the PA, but extends beyond the confines of the myoepithelial cells. Non-invasive CXPA may begin to show malignant transformation, but will overall behave like a benign PA.

#3) Minimally invasive CXPA is defined as <1.5 mm extension into the extracapsular tissue, with a mix of benign PA components and carcinomatous components.

#4) Invasive CXPA is defined as a > 1.5 mm extension into the extracapsular tissue, and will begin to demonstrate more carcinomatous components, such as hemorrhage and necrosis.

As the carcinomatous areas begin to increase in prevalence, the PA nodules will begin to be composed of hyalinized tissue with sparse, scattered ductal structures, and the malignant cells will begin to decrease in size as they move away from the site of origin. Perineural and vascular invasion can be easily identified as the tumor extends into the neighboring tissue (Figure 6).

The development of CXPA has been shown to follow a multi-step model of carcinogenesis with a loss of heterozygosity at chromosomal arms 8q, followed by 12q, and finally 17p. Both PA and CXPA demonstrate the same loss of heterozygosity, however, the carcinomatous components exhibit a slightly higher loss of heterozygosity at 8q, and a significantly higher loss of heterozygosity at 12q and 17q. The early alterations of the chromosomal arm 8q in a PA often involves PLAG1 and MYC, with the malignant transformation of the PA to a CXPA being associated with the 12q genes HMGA2 and MDM2.

Treatment for CXPA involves surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy, with a parotidectomy being the most common procedure performed. If a benign PA had originally been resected, but residual remnants of the PA were left behind, then satellite PA nodules will arise in its place (Figure 3). If in-situ, non-invasive or minimally invasive carcinoma is suspected in the superficial lobe of the parotid gland, than a superficial parotidectomy can be performed. Invasive carcinoma will result in a total parotidectomy, with every attempt made to try and preserve the facial nerve. If metastasis is suspected to the cervical lymph nodes, a neck dissection may also be performed. Reconstructive surgery following the removal of the tumor may be necessary, depending on where the tumor was resected from. Other treatment options currently being considered include a combination therapy of trastuzumab and capecitabine, as well as the possibility of a WT1 peptide based immunotherapy.

Figure 5. 40x microphotograph demonstrating an in-situ carcinoma confined within the myoepithelial cells
Figure 6. 10x photomicrograph of carcinoma at the lateral margin with areas of perineural invasion

References

  1. Antony J, Gopalan V, Smith RA, Lam AK. Carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma: a comprehensive review of clinical, pathological and molecular data. Head Neck Pathol. 2011;6(1):1–9. doi:10.1007/s12105-011-0281-z
  2. Chooback N, Shen Y, Jones M, et al. Carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma: case report and options for systemic therapy. Curr Oncol. 2017;24(3):e251–e254. doi:10.3747/co.24.3588
  3. Di Palma S. Carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma, with particular emphasis on early lesions. Head Neck Pathol. 2013;7 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S68–S76. doi:10.1007/s12105-013-0454-z
  4. Handra-Luca A. Malignant mixed tumor. Pathology Outlines. http://www.pathologyoutlines.com/topic/salivaryglandsmalignantmixedtumor.html. Revised March 21, 2019. Accessed April 5, 2019.

-Cory Nash is a board certified Pathologists’ Assistant, specializing in surgical and gross pathology. He currently works as a Pathologists’ Assistant at the University of Chicago Medical Center. His job involves the macroscopic examination, dissection and tissue submission of surgical specimens, ranging from biopsies to multi-organ resections. Cory has a special interest in head and neck pathology, as well as bone and soft tissue pathology. Cory can be followed on twitter at @iplaywithorgans.

Gastric Cancer: A Multidisciplinary Approach

Maryam Zenali1*, Dmitriy Akselrod2, Eric Ganguly3, Eswar Tipirneni4 and Christopher J. Anker5*

1 Department of Pathology, 2 Department of Radiology, 3 Division of Gastroenterology, and 5 Division of Radiation Oncology, The University of Vermont Medical Center (UVMMC), Burlington, VT and 4 Department of Hematology Oncology, Central Vermont Medical Center (CVMC), The University Of Vermont Health Network, Adult Primary Care, Berlin, VT

*corresponding authors

A 57 year old woman with a personal and family history of breast cancer presented with early satiety and dysphagia for 5 months. Her abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan (Image 1 A) showed marked thickening of an apparently featureless gastric wall (A, blue arrows indicating the mucosal [rightward pointing] and serosal [leftward pointing] aspects of the gastric wall). Prominent gastrohepatic lymph nodes were noted as well. Her fluoroscopic upper GI study (Image1 B), following administration of barium and effervescent crystals (a double contrast effect to allow for mucosal evaluation), showed thickened rugal folds (B red arrow) and pooling of barium within an antral ulcer (B blue arrow). A subsequent CT scan (Image 1 C) after administration of intravenous and enteric contrast, confirmed marked diffuse gastric wall thickening (C blue arrows again indicating the mucosal [rightward pointing] and serosal [leftward pointing] aspects of the gastric wall) (Image 1, composite radiographs A-C).

The gastric body distended poorly with insufflation and demonstrated thickened, erythematous, edematous folds with erosions (Image 2, endoscopy image). On endoscopic ultrasound, the total thickness of the stomach was 12 mm with expanded wall layers in the proximal stomach to the antrum and a thickness of 3.5 mm in spared areas. Biopsies were obtained; the corresponding H&E and keratin stains are provided (Image 3, composite photomicrographs A-B).

Image 1. Composite radiographs.
Image 2. Endoscopy image.
Image 3. Composite photomicrographs.

Based on the original radiographic imaging that led to the biopsy, what are the differential diagnoses?