Search

This article provides observations on the features of sponsor–contract research organization communication that will achieve the best quality pathology report based on our collective experience. Information on the test article and any anticipated findings should be provided, and initial slide examination should be done with knowledge of treatment group (but may be followed by blinded review of target tissues to determine no-effect levels). Only a pathologist should write or revise the pathology report or the pathology section of the overall study report. To address concerns related to undue sponsor influence, comments by sponsors should be presented as suggestions rather than directives. Adversity should be defined for each finding by the study pathologist, but the no-observed adverse effect level should not be discussed in the pathology report. Board-certified pathologists are recommended, but are not essential. Sponsors that have a particular format or report preferences should make them known well in advance. Histologic processing “to glass” of protocol-specified tissues from all dosage groups is recommended for rapid evaluation of target tissues. Telepathology is beneficial in certain situations, but it is usually more efficient for the study pathologist and reviewing pathologist to be in the same physical location to review differences of opinion and reach a consensus.

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPAR) are involved in the pathogenesis of insulin resistance, diabetes, and related complications. Consequently, the identification of PPAR subtypes and the potential for their activation provides promising therapeutic targets for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Available data from rodent carcinogenicity studies, however, demonstrate that PPAR agonists can be tumorigenic in one or more species of rodents at multiple sites. In 2005, the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) PPAR Agonist Project Committee was established by a group of pharmaceutical companies to advance research on and to understand the modes of action and human relevance of this emerging rodent tumor data for PPAR agonists. Since the most commonly observed tumor types reported in rodents are hemangiosarcomas, fibrosarcomas and liposarcomas, the PPAR Agonist Project Committee approved a Pathology Working Group (PWG) to develop consensus of morphologic criteria for tumor diagnoses and consistency of diagnoses across multiple studies for hemangiosarcomas in mice and hamsters and liposarcomas/fibrosarcomas in rats. Therefore, the focus of the PWG review was to establish consistent tumor diagnostic criteria, to assess evidence of potentially preneoplastic changes and to identify distinguishing morphologic differences which may exist between spontaneous changes present in control animals with similar changes from treated animals. Specific diagnostic criteria and nomenclature are recommended for the classification of proliferative vascular lesions which may be present in mice or hamsters and for proliferative mesenchymal changes in rats in studies that are conducted with PPAR agonists.