Interobserver reproducibility of the Lagios nuclear grading system for ductal carcinoma in situ

Several studies have shown an association between high nuclear grade or necrosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) lesions and the risk of local disease recurrence in patients with DCIS treated surgically with less than mastectomy. Although criteria for separating low from high nuclear grade lesion...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Human pathology 1999-03, Vol.30 (3), p.257-262
Hauptverfasser: Sneige, Nour, Lagios, Michael D, Schwarting, Roland, Colburn, William, Atkinson, Edward, Weber, Diane, Sahin, Aysegul, Kemp, Bonnie, Hoque, Ashraful, Risin, Seymon, Sabichi, Anita, Boone, Charles, Dhingra, Kapil, Kelloff, Gary, Lippman, Scott
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Several studies have shown an association between high nuclear grade or necrosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) lesions and the risk of local disease recurrence in patients with DCIS treated surgically with less than mastectomy. Although criteria for separating low from high nuclear grade lesions have been published, no information exists regarding interobserver reproducibility (IR). To assess IR in the classification of DCIS, six surgical pathologists from four institutions used the Lagios grading system to grade 125 DCIS lesions. Before meeting to evaluate the cases, a training set of 12 glass slides, including cases chosen to present conflicting cues for classification, was mailed to the participants with a written criteria summary. This was followed by a working session in which criteria were reviewed and agreed on. The pathologists then graded the lesions independently. The area of interest was marked on each slide before grading. After initial grading, the pathologists met again to resolve discrepant lesion classifications. A complete agreement among raters was achieved in 43 (35%) cases, with five of six raters agreeing in another 45 (36%) cases. In no case did two raters differ by more than one grade. The pairwise κ agreement values ranged from fair to substantial (0.30 to 0.61). Generalized κ value indicated moderate agreement (0.46, standard error = 0.02). κ statistics for the distinction between grades 1 and 2 and 2 and 3 were 0.29 and 0.48, respectively, (standard error = 0.02). Only one of the six raters differed significantly in scoring. With adherence to specific criteria, IR in the classification of DCIS cases can be obtained in most cases. Although these pathologists made a few grading system modifications, further refinements are needed, especially if grading will influence future therapy.
ISSN:0046-8177
1532-8392
DOI:10.1016/S0046-8177(99)90002-3