CONTEXT: -Low interobserver diagnostic agreement exists among high-grade endometrial carcinomas. OBJECTIVE: -To evaluate diagnostic variability in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) grade 3 endometrioid adenocarcinoma (G3EC) in 2 different sign-out practices. DESIGN: -Sixty-six G3EC cases were identified from pathology archives of Wayne State University (WSU, Detroit, Michigan) (general surgical pathology sign-out) and 65 from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK, New York, New York) (gynecologic pathology focused sign-out). Each case was reviewed together by 2 gynecologic pathologists, one from each institution, and classified into the G3EC group or a reclassified group. Clinicopathologic parameters were compared. RESULTS: -Twenty-five WSU cases (38%) were reclassified as undifferentiated (n = 2), serous (n = 4), mixed endometrioid and serous carcinomas (n = 12), and FIGO grade 2 endometrioid adenocarcinomas with focal marked nuclear atypia (n = 7). Eleven MSK cases (17%) were reclassified as undifferentiated (n = 5), serous (n = 1), mixed endometrioid and serous carcinomas (n = 4), and mixed endometrioid and clear cell carcinomas (n = 1). Agreement rate between original and review diagnosis was 83% (54 of 65) at MSK and 62% (41 of 66) at WSU (P = .01) with an overall rate of 73% (95 of 131). There were more undifferentiated carcinomas at MSK than there were at WSU (45% [5 of 11] versus 8% [2 of 25]; P = .02). There were more grade 2 endometrioid adenocarcinomas with focal, marked nuclear atypia at WSU (28%; 7 of 25) than there were at MSK (0%) (P = .03). Mixed endometrioid and serous carcinoma was the most common misclassified subtype (44%; 16 of 36). CONCLUSION: -Moderate interobserver variability exists in the diagnosis of G3EC with a significantly greater diagnostic agreement rate in gynecologic pathology-focused sign-out than in general sign-out practice.
CONTEXT: -Low interobserver diagnostic agreement exists among high-grade endometrial carcinomas. OBJECTIVE: -To evaluate diagnostic variability in International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) grade 3 endometrioid adenocarcinoma (G3EC) in 2 different sign-out practices. DESIGN: -Sixty-six G3EC cases were identified from pathology archives of Wayne State University (WSU, Detroit, Michigan) (general surgical pathology sign-out) and 65 from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK, New York, New York) (gynecologic pathology focused sign-out). Each case was reviewed together by 2 gynecologic pathologists, one from each institution, and classified into the G3EC group or a reclassified group. Clinicopathologic parameters were compared. RESULTS: -Twenty-five WSU cases (38%) were reclassified as undifferentiated (n = 2), serous (n = 4), mixed endometrioid and serous carcinomas (n = 12), and FIGO grade 2 endometrioid adenocarcinomas with focal marked nuclear atypia (n = 7). Eleven MSK cases (17%) were reclassified as undifferentiated (n = 5), serous (n = 1), mixed endometrioid and serous carcinomas (n = 4), and mixed endometrioid and clear cell carcinomas (n = 1). Agreement rate between original and review diagnosis was 83% (54 of 65) at MSK and 62% (41 of 66) at WSU (P = .01) with an overall rate of 73% (95 of 131). There were more undifferentiated carcinomas at MSK than there were at WSU (45% [5 of 11] versus 8% [2 of 25]; P = .02). There were more grade 2 endometrioid adenocarcinomas with focal, marked nuclear atypia at WSU (28%; 7 of 25) than there were at MSK (0%) (P = .03). Mixed endometrioid and serous carcinoma was the most common misclassified subtype (44%; 16 of 36). CONCLUSION: -Moderate interobserver variability exists in the diagnosis of G3EC with a significantly greater diagnostic agreement rate in gynecologic pathology-focused sign-out than in general sign-out practice.
Authors: Lien N Hoang; Melissa K McConechy; Martin Köbel; Guangming Han; Marjan Rouzbahman; Ben Davidson; Julie Irving; Rola H Ali; Sam Leung; Jessica N McAlpine; Esther Oliva; Marisa R Nucci; Robert A Soslow; David G Huntsman; C Blake Gilks; Cheng-Han Lee Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: William T Creasman; Matthew F Kohler; Franco Odicino; Patrick Maisonneuve; Peter Boyle Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Astrid N Scholten; Vincent T H B M Smit; Henk Beerman; Wim L J van Putten; Carien L Creutzberg Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: C A Hamilton; M K Cheung; K Osann; L Chen; N N Teng; T A Longacre; M A Powell; M R Hendrickson; D S Kapp; J K Chan Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2006-03-13 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Matthieu Le Gallo; Meghan L Rudd; Mary Ellen Urick; Nancy F Hansen; Suiyuan Zhang; Fred Lozy; Dennis C Sgroi; August Vidal Bel; Xavier Matias-Guiu; Russell R Broaddus; Karen H Lu; Douglas A Levine; David G Mutch; Paul J Goodfellow; Helga B Salvesen; James C Mullikin; Daphne W Bell Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-05-09 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Rachel J Derscheid; Michael C Rahe; Eric R Burrough; Kent J Schwartz; Bailey Arruda Journal: J Vet Diagn Invest Date: 2021-03-10 Impact factor: 1.279
Authors: Elke E M Peters; Carla Bartosch; W Glenn McCluggage; Catherine Genestie; Sigurd F Lax; Remi Nout; Jan Oosting; Naveena Singh; Huub C S H Smit; Vincent T H B M Smit; Koen K Van de Vijver; Tjalling Bosse Journal: Histopathology Date: 2019-06-10 Impact factor: 5.087