{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.010050251256281407, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.947761194029851, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Keratin expression in a cervical lymph node aspirate

The use of a panel of antibodies is always recommended to solve diagnostic dilemmas in routine cytopathology services in view of the lack of absolute sensitivity and specificity of various markers and their lack of absolute distinctive power. However, sometimes in a case with highly suggestive cytological features in a very obvious clinical setting, one may be tempted to use one or two markers to save cost and time. Furthermore, in cases with few cytology slides available for immunochemistry, one is forced to choose only one or two markers in cytology. We report our experience from such a case to highlight the importance of the recommended practice in the use of immunochemistry and to be cautious in interpretation of single markers.