Mapping the de-implementation of traditional diagnostic tests in pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
This qualitative single-center study maps St. Jude’s replacement of routine conventional cytogenetics with clinical genomics for pediatric ALL diagnosis and identifies implementation lessons, perceived benefits, and institutional risks.
Open original publication →What the AI sees
This qualitative single-center study maps St. Jude’s replacement of routine conventional cytogenetics with clinical genomics for pediatric ALL diagnosis and identifies implementation lessons, perceived benefits, and institutional risks.
Research significance
The reported evidence supports the feasibility of cytogenetics de-implementation at one institution; by inference, genomics-centered diagnostic workflows could improve classification and resource use and potentially inform treatment selection, but the record provides no direct evidence of improved treatment outcomes.
Source abstract
INTRODUCTION: Advances in cancer diagnostics raise questions about when and how to de-implement traditional approaches; however, these processes remain poorly described. At St. Jude Children's Research Hospital (SJCRH), routine conventional cytogenetics for pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) diagnosis was de-implemented in 2018 following adoption of clinical genomics. This study aimed to map this process to inform future diagnostic de-implementation initiatives. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with SJCRH staff involved or impacted by cytogenetics de-implementation. Data were analyzed using thematic and rapid qualitative analysis informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Member-checking was used to verify and refine process maps, which were subsequently reviewed by an external expert panel, representing diverse settings, through focus group discussions. RESULTS: Thirteen SJCRH clinicians participated. De-implementation was described as successful, with no negative impact on patient outcomes. Decision-making began with internal correlation studies that demonstrated superior diagnostic performance of clinical genomics. De-implementation was viewed as a natural evolution that improved molecular classification, resource allocation, and workflow efficiency. Perceived risks included loss of cytogenetics competency, delayed turnaround time, and career insecurity, all addressed institutionally. Lessons learned highlighted the importance of deliberate discussion about logic and evidence supporting de-implementation. Fifteen external experts offered suggestions to improve process map generalizability, highlighting institutional- and system-level considerations. CONCLUSION: De-implementation of cytogenetics in ALL in favor of clinical genomics was successful at SJCRH. This study offers an example of diagnostic de-implementation in cancer care and proposes a structured approach to guide future efforts. De-implementation should be considered alongside introduction of novel diagnostic approaches.