Pediatric neuropathology practice in a low- and middle-income country: capacity building through institutional twinning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Accurate and precise diagnosis is central to treating central nervous system (CNS) tumors, yet tissue diagnosis is often a neglected focus in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Since 2016, the WHO classification of CNS tumors has increasingly incorporated molecular biomarkers into the diagnosis of CNS tumors. While this shift to precision diagnostics promises a high degree of diagnostic accuracy and prognostic precision, it has also resulted in increasing divergence in diagnostic and management practices between LMICs and high-income countries (HICs). Pathologists and laboratory professionals in LMICs lack the proper training and tools to join the molecular diagnostic revolution. We describe the impact of a 7-year long twinning program between Canada and Pakistan on pathology services. Methods: During the study period, 141 challenging cases of pediatric CNS tumors initially diagnosed at Aga Khan University Hospital (AKUH), Karachi, were sent to the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, Canada (SickKids), for a second opinion. Each case received histologic review and often immunohistochemical staining and relevant molecular testing. A monthly multidisciplinary online tumor board (MDTB) was conducted to discuss the results with pathologists from both institutions in attendance. Results: Diagnostic discordance was seen in 30 cases. Expert review provided subclassification for 53 cases most notably for diffuse gliomas and medulloblastoma. Poorly differentiated tumors benefited the most from second review, mainly because of the resolving power of specialized immunohistochemical stains, NanoString, and targeted gene panel next-generation sequencing. Collaboration with expert neuropathologists led to validation of over half a dozen immunostains at AKUH facilitating diagnosis of CNS tumors. Conclusions: LMIC-HIC Institutional twinning provides much-needed training and mentorship to pathologists and can help in infrastructure development by adopting and validating new immunohistochemical stains. Persistent unresolved cases indicate that molecular techniques are indispensable in for diagnosis in a minority of cases. The development of affordable alternative molecular techniques may help with these histologically unresolved cases.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".