Literature DB >> 33370310

Variation in breast cancer grading in 1,636 resections assessed using control charts and in silico kappa.

Jinesa Moodley1, Phillip Williams2, Gabriela Gohla1, Pierre Major3, Michael Bonert1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Assess interpretative variation in Nottingham grading using control charts (CCs) and in silico kappa (ISK).
METHODS: In house invasive breast cancer cases (2011-2019) at two institutions with a synoptic report were extracted. Pathologist interpretative rates (PIRs) were calculated and normed for Nottingham grade (G) and its components (tubular score (TS), nuclear score (NS), mitotic score (MS)) for pathologists interpreting >35 cases. ISKs were calculated using the ordered mutually exclusive category assumption (OMECA) and maximal categorical overlap assumption (MCOA).
RESULTS: The study period included 1,994 resections. Ten pathologists each assessed 38-441 cases and together saw 1,636; these were further analyzed. The PIR medians (normed ranges) were: G1:24%(18-27%), G2:53%(43-56%) and G3:26%(19-33%). The MCOA ISK and the number of statistical outliers (p< 0.05/p< 0.001) to the group median interpretive rate (GMIR) for the ten pathologists was G1: 0.82(2/0 of 10), G2: 0.76(1/1), G3: 0.71(3/1), TS1: 0.79(1/0), TS2: 0.63(5/1), TS3: 0.66(5/1), NS1: 0.37(5/4), NS2: 0.60(4/3), NS3: 0.59(4/4), MS1: 0.78(3/1), MS2: 0.78(3/1), MS3: 0.77(2/0). The OMECA ISK was 0.62, 0.49, 0.69 and 0.71 for TS, NS, MS and G.
CONCLUSIONS: The nuclear score has the most outliers. NS1 appears to be inconsistently used. ISK mirrors trends in conventional kappa studies. CCs and ISK allow insight into interpretive variation and may be essential for the next generation in quality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33370310      PMCID: PMC7769472          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242656

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  20 in total

1.  Next generation quality, Part 2: Balanced scorecards and organizational improvement.

Authors:  R J Luttman
Journal:  Top Health Inf Manage       Date:  1998-11

2.  Next generation quality, Part 1: Gateway to clinical process excellence.

Authors:  R J Luttman
Journal:  Top Health Inf Manage       Date:  1998-11

3.  Reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of the Scarff-Bloom-Richardson histological grading system and the complementary value of Ki-67 to this system.

Authors:  Rui Zhang; Hui-jiao Chen; Bing Wei; Hong-ying Zhang; Zong-guo Pang; Hong Zhu; Zhang Zhang; Jing Fu; Hong Bu
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 2.628

Review 4.  The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements.

Authors:  Julius Sim; Chris C Wright
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2005-03

5.  Breast carcinoma malignancy grading by Bloom-Richardson system vs proliferation index: reproducibility of grade and advantages of proliferation index.

Authors:  John S Meyer; Consuelo Alvarez; Clara Milikowski; Neal Olson; Irma Russo; Jose Russo; Andrew Glass; Barbara A Zehnbauer; Karen Lister; Reza Parwaresch
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 7.842

6.  Histologic grading of breast cancer. Let's do it.

Authors:  D L Page; I O Ellis; C W Elston
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 2.493

7.  Histologic grading in breast cancer--reproducibility between seven pathologic departments. South Sweden Breast Cancer Group.

Authors:  P Boiesen; P O Bendahl; L Anagnostaki; H Domanski; E Holm; I Idvall; S Johansson; O Ljungberg; A Ringberg; G Ostberg; M Fernö
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.089

8.  Comprehensive Histologic Scoring to Maximize the Predictability of Pathology-generated Equation of Breast Cancer Oncotype DX Recurrence Score.

Authors:  Thaer Khoury; Xiao Huang; Xiwei Chen; Dan Wang; Song Liu; Mateusz Opyrchal
Journal:  Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol       Date:  2016 Nov/Dec

Review 9.  Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade.

Authors:  Emad A Rakha; Jorge S Reis-Filho; Frederick Baehner; David J Dabbs; Thomas Decker; Vincenzo Eusebi; Stephen B Fox; Shu Ichihara; Jocelyne Jacquemier; Sunil R Lakhani; José Palacios; Andrea L Richardson; Stuart J Schnitt; Fernando C Schmitt; Puay-Hoon Tan; Gary M Tse; Sunil Badve; Ian O Ellis
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2010-07-30       Impact factor: 6.466

10.  Next Generation Quality: Assessing the Physician in Clinical History Completeness and Diagnostic Interpretations Using Funnel Plots and Normalized Deviations Plots in 3,854 Prostate Biopsies.

Authors:  Michael Bonert; Ihab El-Shinnawy; Michael Carvalho; Phillip Williams; Samih Salama; Damu Tang; Anil Kapoor
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2017-11-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.