Literature DB >> 32297416

Concordance among hematopathologists in classifying blasts plus promonocytes: A bone marrow pathology group study.

Kathryn Foucar1, Eric D Hsi2, Sa A Wang3, Heesun J Rogers2, Robert P Hasserjian4, Adam Bagg5, Tracy I George1, Roland L Bassett3, LoAnn C Peterson6, William G Morice7, Daniel A Arber8, Attilio Orazi9, Carlos E Bueso-Ramos3.   

Abstract

Enumeration of blasts and promonocytes is essential for World Health Organization (WHO) classification of myelomonocytic neoplasms. The accuracy of distinguishing blasts, promonocytes and monocytes, including normal vs abnormal monocytes, remains controversial. The objective of this analysis is to assess concordances between experienced hematopathologists in classifying cells as blasts, promonocytes, and monocytes according to WHO criteria. Each of 11 hematopathologists assessed glass slides from 20 patients [12 with chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) and 8 with acute myeloid leukemia (AML)] including blood and BM aspirate smears, and limited nonspecific esterase (NSE) stains. All cases were blindly reviewed. Fleiss' extension of Cohen's kappa for multiple raters was used on these variables, separately for peripheral blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM). Spearman's rank correlation was used to assess correlations between each pair of hematopathologists for each measurement. For the classification based on the sum of blasts and promonocytes in the BM, Fleiss' kappa was estimated as 0.744. For PB, categorizing patients according to the sum of blasts and promonocytes, Fleiss' kappa was estimated as 0.949. Distinction of abnormal monocytes from normal monocytes in PB did not achieve a good concordance and showed strong evidence of differences between hematopathologists (P < .0001). The hematopathologists achieved a good concordance rate of 74% in CMML vs AML classification and a high k rate, confirming that criteria for defining the blasts equivalents (blasts plus promonocytes) could be applied consistently. Identification of monocyte subtypes (abnormal vs normal) was not concordant. Our results support the practice of combining blasts/promonocytes into a single category.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  abnormal monocyte; concordance; monoblast; promonocyte

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32297416     DOI: 10.1111/ijlh.13212

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Lab Hematol        ISSN: 1751-5521            Impact factor:   2.877


  3 in total

Review 1.  Clinical and Molecular Approach to Adult-Onset, Neoplastic Monocytosis.

Authors:  Rory M Shallis; Alexa J Siddon; Amer M Zeidan
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 3.952

2.  Classification of Monocytes, Promonocytes and Monoblasts Using Deep Neural Network Models: An Area of Unmet Need in Diagnostic Hematopathology.

Authors:  Mazen Osman; Zeynettin Akkus; Dragan Jevremovic; Phuong L Nguyen; Dana Roh; Aref Al-Kali; Mrinal M Patnaik; Ahmad Nanaa; Samia Rizk; Mohamed E Salama
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 4.241

3.  Impact of age on the cumulative risk of transformation in patients with chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia.

Authors:  Sigrid Machherndl-Spandl; Eva Jäger; Agnes Barna; Michael Gurbisz; Renate Marschon; Temeida Graf; Elmir Graf; Christoph Geissler; Gregor Hoermann; Thomas Nösslinger; Michael Pfeilstöcker; Peter Bettelheim; Otto Zach; Ansgar Weltermann; Sonja Heibl; Josef Thaler; Armin Zebisch; Heinz Sill; Reinhard Stauder; Gerald Webersinke; Rajko Kusec; Ernst Ulsperger; Bruno Schneeweiss; Leopold Öhler; Ulrich Germing; Peter Valent; Heinz Tüchler; Klaus Geissler
Journal:  Eur J Haematol       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 2.997

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.