Literature DB >> 12792917

Evaluation of the interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma using tissue microarrays.

Alexandre De la Taille1, Annick Viellefond, Nicole Berger, Eric Boucher, Marc De Fromont, Alain Fondimare, Vincent Molinié, Dominique Piron, Mathilde Sibony, Frédéric Staroz, Marie Triller, Eric Peltier, Nicolas Thiounn, Mark A Rubin.   

Abstract

The Gleason system is the internationally recognized standard for grading prostate cancer, due mainly to its strong prognostic capability. However, interobserver reproducibility is variable in the community setting. Herein we present a novel approach to evaluating Gleason grading among pathologists using high-density tissue microarrays (TMAs). A CD-ROM containing 537 different TMA spot images of 0.6-mm diameter was sent to 10 genitourinary pathologists in France. The pathologists were expected to score each TMA spot based on their experience evaluating standard prostate biopsies, transurethral resections, and prostatectomy samples. There was no consensus meeting beforehand to agree on how the group would apply the Gleason grading system for this project. Percentage of agreement and kappa value were used to assess the level of agreement. A short questionnaire was sent to assess pathologists' opinion on this new approach to evaluating Gleason grading. An average of 311 images were analyzed (range, 104 to 537; median, 256.5). Four of the pathologists evaluated all 537 images and assigned Gleason grades to 149 images with an overall kappa for interobserver agreement for the exact score between 0.31 and 0.52 and between 0.45 to 0.69 if 3 Gleason categories (</=6, 7, and >7) were used. When 2 categories were considered (</=7 or >7), kappa ranged from 0.58 to 0.83. All pathologists analyzed 104 images. Similar results were obtained with an agreement between 0.28 and 0.54 for the 3 Gleason categories. After finishing this test, 90% of genitourinary pathologists considered this approach useful for resident training and 90% for pathology teaching. We conclude that a Gleason score can be easily assigned to each TMA spot of a 0.6-mm-diameter prostate cancer sample. These data also indicated that using TMA spot images may be a good approach for teaching the Gleason grading system due to the small area of tissue.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12792917     DOI: 10.1016/s0046-8177(03)00123-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Pathol        ISSN: 0046-8177            Impact factor:   3.466


  6 in total

1.  Molecular sampling of prostate cancer: a dilemma for predicting disease progression.

Authors:  Andrea Sboner; Francesca Demichelis; Stefano Calza; Yudi Pawitan; Sunita R Setlur; Yujin Hoshida; Sven Perner; Hans-Olov Adami; Katja Fall; Lorelei A Mucci; Philip W Kantoff; Meir Stampfer; Swen-Olof Andersson; Eberhard Varenhorst; Jan-Erik Johansson; Mark B Gerstein; Todd R Golub; Mark A Rubin; Ove Andrén
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2010-03-16       Impact factor: 3.063

2.  Frequency and determinants of disagreement and error in gleason scores: a population-based study of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Michael Goodman; Kevin C Ward; Adeboye O Osunkoya; Milton W Datta; Daniel Luthringer; Andrew N Young; Katerina Marks; Vaunita Cohen; Jan C Kennedy; Michael J Haber; Mahul B Amin
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2012-01-06       Impact factor: 4.104

Review 3.  Reproducibility and reliability of tumor grading in urological neoplasms.

Authors:  Rainer Engers
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2007-09-09       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading: evaluation using prostate cancer tissue microarrays.

Authors:  M Burchardt; R Engers; M Müller; T Burchardt; R Willers; J I Epstein; R Ackermann; H E Gabbert; A de la Taille; M A Rubin
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-04-08       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 5.  Tissue Microarray: A rapidly evolving diagnostic and research tool.

Authors:  Nazar M T Jawhar
Journal:  Ann Saudi Med       Date:  2009 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.526

6.  Biomarker expression patterns that correlate with high grade features in treatment naive, organ-confined prostate cancer.

Authors:  Timothy J McDonnell; Nikhil S Chari; Jeong Hee Cho-Vega; Patricia Troncoso; Xuemei Wang; Carlos E Bueso-Ramos; Kevin Coombes; Shawn Brisbay; Remigio Lopez; George Prendergast; Christopher Logothetis; Kim-Anh Do
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2008-01-31       Impact factor: 3.063

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.