Literature DB >> 21532546

Atypical ductal hyperplasia: interobserver and intraobserver variability.

Rohit K Jain1, Rutika Mehta, Rosen Dimitrov, Lisbeth G Larsson, Paul M Musto, Kurt B Hodges, Thomas M Ulbright, Eyas M Hattab, Narasimhan Agaram, Muhammad T Idrees, Sunil Badve.   

Abstract

Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of benign intraductal proliferative lesions has been poor. The aims of the study were to investigate the inter- and intraobserver variability and the impact of the addition of an immunostain for high- and low-molecular weight keratins on the variability. Nine pathologists reviewed 81 cases of breast proliferative lesions in three stages and assigned each of the lesions to one of the following three diagnoses: usual ductal hyperplasia, atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ. Hematoxylin and eosin slides and corresponding slides stained with ADH-5 cocktail (cytokeratins (CK) 5, 14. 7, 18 and p63) by immunohistochemistry were evaluated. Concordance was evaluated at each stage of the study. The interobserver agreement among the nine pathologists for diagnosing the 81 proliferative breast lesions was fair (κ-value=0.34). The intraobserver κ-value ranged from 0.56 to 0.88 (moderate to strong). Complete agreement among nine pathologists was achieved in only nine (11%) cases, at least eight agreed in 20 (25%) cases and seven or more agreed in 38 (47%) cases. Following immunohistochemical stain, a significant improvement in the interobserver concordance (overall κ-value=0.50) was observed (P=0.015). There was a significant reduction in the total number of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosis made by nine pathologists after the use of ADH-5 immunostain. Atypical ductal hyperplasia still remains a diagnostic dilemma with wide variation in both inter- and intraobserver reproducibility among pathologists. The addition of an immunohistochemical stain led to a significant improvement in the concordance rate. More importantly, there was an 8% decrease in the number of lesions classified as atypical ductal hyperplasia in favor of usual hyperplasia; in clinical practice, this could lead to a decrease in the number of surgeries carried out for intraductal proliferative lesions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21532546     DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2011.66

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mod Pathol        ISSN: 0893-3952            Impact factor:   7.842


  25 in total

1.  Histological features associated with diagnostic agreement in atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast: illustrative cases from the B-Path study.

Authors:  Kimberly H Allison; Mara H Rendi; Sue Peacock; Tom Morgan; Joann G Elmore; Donald L Weaver
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 5.087

2.  Silencing HoxA1 by intraductal injection of siRNA lipidoid nanoparticles prevents mammary tumor progression in mice.

Authors:  Amy Brock; Silva Krause; Hu Li; Marek Kowalski; Michael S Goldberg; James J Collins; Donald E Ingber
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2014-01-01       Impact factor: 17.956

3.  Risk Factors That Increase Risk of Estrogen Receptor-Positive and -Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Karla Kerlikowske; Charlotte C Gard; Jeffrey A Tice; Elad Ziv; Steven R Cummings; Diana L Miglioretti
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2016-12-31       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Intraductal Delivery to the Rabbit Mammary Gland.

Authors:  Amelia Clark; Nora K Bird; Amy Brock
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 1.355

5.  Benign breast disease, mammographic breast density, and the risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Tice; Ellen S O'Meara; Donald L Weaver; Celine Vachon; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Karla Kerlikowske
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Atypical hyperplasia of the breast--risk assessment and management options.

Authors:  Lynn C Hartmann; Amy C Degnim; Richard J Santen; William D Dupont; Karthik Ghosh
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-01-01       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Computerized classification of intraductal breast lesions using histopathological images.

Authors:  M Murat Dundar; Sunil Badve; Gokhan Bilgin; Vikas Raykar; Rohit Jain; Olcay Sertel; Metin N Gurcan
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2011-02-04       Impact factor: 4.538

8.  Understanding diagnostic variability in breast pathology: lessons learned from an expert consensus review panel.

Authors:  Kimberly H Allison; Lisa M Reisch; Patricia A Carney; Donald L Weaver; Stuart J Schnitt; Frances P O'Malley; Berta M Geller; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Histopathology       Date:  2014-04-02       Impact factor: 5.087

9.  Quantitative phase imaging of stromal prognostic markers in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Michael Fanous; Adib Keikhosravi; Andre Kajdacsy-Balla; Kevin W Eliceiri; Gabriel Popescu
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2020-02-12       Impact factor: 3.732

10.  Multi-Instance Multi-Label Learning for Multi-Class Classification of Whole Slide Breast Histopathology Images.

Authors:  Caner Mercan; Selim Aksoy; Ezgi Mercan; Linda G Shapiro; Donald L Weaver; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2017-10-02       Impact factor: 10.048

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.