BACKGROUND: Tumour stroma ratio (TSR) in histological sections of resected oesophageal adenocarcinomas proved to be a prognostic factor for patients' survival. The objectives of this study were to assess inter- and intraobserver agreement for TSR scoring on biopsy material and to validate these biopsy results with the results derived from surgical specimens. METHODS: Biopsies and surgical specimens of 91 patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma were available. TSR was determined on the original haematoxylin-eosin (H&E) tissue sections from primary tumour biopsies. To assess interobserver variation, TSR was scored by three pathologists as 0-25%, 25-50%, 50-75% or 75-100%. A second scoring was done to examine intraobserver variation. The definitive TSR biopsy score was compared with the corresponding resection specimen score. Kappa statistics were applied to evaluate agreement. RESULTS: Biopsies of 10 (11%) patients were rejected because of poor quality. For 81 TSR biopsy scores, interobserver correlations ranged between 0.239 and 0.486 (P < 0.001 for all). By classifying scores into two groups (<50% and ≥ 50%), interobserver correlations ranged between 0.372 and 0.886 (P < 0.001 for all). Intraobserver agreement was substantial to near-perfect (κ = 0.780-0.848; P < 0.001 for all). Definitive TSR biopsy score showed moderate correlation with TSR scores on surgical specimens (κ = 0.506), but it was an independent prognostic factor for survival. CONCLUSION: Reproducibility of tumour stroma ratio scoring on oesophageal adenocarcinoma biopsies was good. The ease of TSR scoring on H&E sections together with its correlation with patients' survival may have clinical relevance in this era of neoadjuvant therapy.
BACKGROUND:Tumour stroma ratio (TSR) in histological sections of resected oesophageal adenocarcinomas proved to be a prognostic factor for patients' survival. The objectives of this study were to assess inter- and intraobserver agreement for TSR scoring on biopsy material and to validate these biopsy results with the results derived from surgical specimens. METHODS: Biopsies and surgical specimens of 91 patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma were available. TSR was determined on the original haematoxylin-eosin (H&E) tissue sections from primary tumour biopsies. To assess interobserver variation, TSR was scored by three pathologists as 0-25%, 25-50%, 50-75% or 75-100%. A second scoring was done to examine intraobserver variation. The definitive TSR biopsy score was compared with the corresponding resection specimen score. Kappa statistics were applied to evaluate agreement. RESULTS: Biopsies of 10 (11%) patients were rejected because of poor quality. For 81 TSR biopsy scores, interobserver correlations ranged between 0.239 and 0.486 (P < 0.001 for all). By classifying scores into two groups (<50% and ≥ 50%), interobserver correlations ranged between 0.372 and 0.886 (P < 0.001 for all). Intraobserver agreement was substantial to near-perfect (κ = 0.780-0.848; P < 0.001 for all). Definitive TSR biopsy score showed moderate correlation with TSR scores on surgical specimens (κ = 0.506), but it was an independent prognostic factor for survival. CONCLUSION: Reproducibility of tumour stroma ratio scoring on oesophageal adenocarcinoma biopsies was good. The ease of TSR scoring on H&E sections together with its correlation with patients' survival may have clinical relevance in this era of neoadjuvant therapy.
Authors: T J A Dekker; A Charehbili; V T H B M Smit; P ten Dijke; E Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg; C J H van de Velde; J W R Nortier; R A E M Tollenaar; W E Mesker; J R Kroep Journal: Mol Oncol Date: 2015-02-14 Impact factor: 6.603
Authors: Sophie C Hagenaars; Kiki M H Vangangelt; Gabi W Van Pelt; Zsófia Karancsi; Rob A E M Tollenaar; Andrew R Green; Emad A Rakha; Janina Kulka; Wilma E Mesker Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2022-04-16 Impact factor: 4.624
Authors: L H McCormick Matthews; F Noble; J Tod; E Jaynes; S Harris; J N Primrose; C Ottensmeier; G J Thomas; T J Underwood Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: W E Mesker; T J A Dekker; E M de Kruijf; C C Engels; G W van Pelt; V T H B M Smit; R A E M Tollenaar Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2014-11-13 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Timothy J Underwood; Annette L Hayden; Mathieu Derouet; Edwin Garcia; Fergus Noble; Michael J White; Steve Thirdborough; Abbie Mead; Nicholas Clemons; Massimiliano Mellone; Chudy Uzoho; John N Primrose; Jeremy P Blaydes; Gareth J Thomas Journal: J Pathol Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 7.996
Authors: C L Downey; S A Simpkins; D L Holliday; J L Jones; L B Jordan; J Kulka; A M Hanby; V Speirs Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2014-11-13 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: René Scheer; Alexi Baidoshvili; Shorena Zoidze; Marloes A G Elferink; Annefleur E M Berkel; Joost M Klaase; Paul J van Diest Journal: World J Gastrointest Oncol Date: 2017-12-15
Authors: R Rogojanu; T Thalhammer; U Thiem; A Heindl; I Mesteri; A Seewald; W Jäger; C Smochina; I Ellinger; G Bises Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-10-22 Impact factor: 3.411