Histological grading in breast cancer: interobserver agreement, and relation to other prognostic factors including ploidy
Sections of neoplasms from 76 female patients with primary operable carcinoma of the breast were independently assessed by 2 pathologists for histological features and assigned a grade score. Relative disagreement rates between pathologists were estimated by use of a log-linear model and found to be...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Pathology 1992, Vol.24 (2), p.63-68 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 68 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 63 |
container_title | Pathology |
container_volume | 24 |
creator | Harvey, Jennet M. de Klerk, Nicholas H. Sterrett, Gregory F. |
description | Sections of neoplasms from 76 female patients with primary operable carcinoma of the breast were independently assessed by 2 pathologists for histological features and assigned a grade score. Relative disagreement rates between pathologists were estimated by use of a log-linear model and found to be similar to those reported by many other groups, but higher than that reported by acknowledged experts. Tumor grade was related to nuclear DNA content as measured by static cytometry, inversely related to oestrogen receptor status and provided some additional prognostic information but, in this small series of patients, did not correlate with short-term survival as closely as other prognostic indicators such as ploidy, tumor size or the extent of lymph node involvement. Patients with Grade III tumors had a particularly poor prognosis, however, there were few patients allotted to Grade III (poorly differentiated tumors), and survival differences between Grades I and II were small; in short-term followup, used alone, grading separated out only a small proportion of patients into useful prognostic groups.
This preliminary study emphasizes the need for a careful approach to the use of grading of breast carcinomas in the routine histopathology laboratory. Demonstration of higher levels of interobserver agreement, or concordance with experts in the field, will be necessary before our grading can be incorporated into a prognostic index useful for patient management. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3109/00313029209063625 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_73102874</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0031302516358482</els_id><sourcerecordid>73102874</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-81bb520ed365b9d45a259d259a2e84250b1c335f63f59745224f51a4be0a6af63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1r3DAQhkVoSbdpf0APBZ16ilN9eu32VEKaFAK9tGczlsdeBVvajuTA_vsq2YUeCjkIwbwfjB4x9kGKKy1F-1kILbVQrRKtqHWt7BnbSFPbSrdavmKbJ70qBvuGvU3pQQhhmqY5Z-eyNlLVasMOdz7lOMfJO5j5RDD4MHEfeE8IKXMHwSF9KZOMFPuE9IjEYSLEBUO-5BAGTjhD9jHwHHnMu2LYU5xCTNk7PoLLkVJpcPP63L6fox8O79jrEeaE70_3Bfv9_ebX9V11__P2x_W3-8oZIXLVyL63SuCga9u3g7GgbDuUAwobo6zopdPajrUebbs1VikzWgmmRwE1lPEF-3TsLTv9WTHlbvHJ4TxDwLimbltIqmZrilEejY5iSoRjtye_AB06Kbon3N1_uEvm46l87Rcc_iWOfIv-9aj7MEZaYIcw550Dwu4hrhTKw19sP6Wx8Hn0SF1yHsuHDJ7Q5W6I_oX0Xw9woNs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>73102874</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Histological grading in breast cancer: interobserver agreement, and relation to other prognostic factors including ploidy</title><source>Taylor & Francis</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Harvey, Jennet M. ; de Klerk, Nicholas H. ; Sterrett, Gregory F.</creator><creatorcontrib>Harvey, Jennet M. ; de Klerk, Nicholas H. ; Sterrett, Gregory F.</creatorcontrib><description>Sections of neoplasms from 76 female patients with primary operable carcinoma of the breast were independently assessed by 2 pathologists for histological features and assigned a grade score. Relative disagreement rates between pathologists were estimated by use of a log-linear model and found to be similar to those reported by many other groups, but higher than that reported by acknowledged experts. Tumor grade was related to nuclear DNA content as measured by static cytometry, inversely related to oestrogen receptor status and provided some additional prognostic information but, in this small series of patients, did not correlate with short-term survival as closely as other prognostic indicators such as ploidy, tumor size or the extent of lymph node involvement. Patients with Grade III tumors had a particularly poor prognosis, however, there were few patients allotted to Grade III (poorly differentiated tumors), and survival differences between Grades I and II were small; in short-term followup, used alone, grading separated out only a small proportion of patients into useful prognostic groups.
This preliminary study emphasizes the need for a careful approach to the use of grading of breast carcinomas in the routine histopathology laboratory. Demonstration of higher levels of interobserver agreement, or concordance with experts in the field, will be necessary before our grading can be incorporated into a prognostic index useful for patient management.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0031-3025</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1465-3931</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3109/00313029209063625</identifier><identifier>PMID: 1641262</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Breast cancer ; Breast Neoplasms - pathology ; Carcinoma - pathology ; Cell Nucleus - pathology ; Female ; Histological Techniques ; Humans ; inter-observer agreement ; Middle Aged ; Mitosis ; Observer Variation ; Ploidies ; ploidy ; Prognosis ; Receptors, Estrogen - analysis ; tumor grade</subject><ispartof>Pathology, 1992, Vol.24 (2), p.63-68</ispartof><rights>1992 Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia</rights><rights>1992 Informa UK Ltd All rights reserved: reproduction in whole or part not permitted 1992</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-81bb520ed365b9d45a259d259a2e84250b1c335f63f59745224f51a4be0a6af63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-81bb520ed365b9d45a259d259a2e84250b1c335f63f59745224f51a4be0a6af63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.3109/00313029209063625$$EPDF$$P50$$Ginformahealthcare$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3109/00313029209063625$$EHTML$$P50$$Ginformahealthcare$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,4009,27902,27903,27904,61197,61378</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1641262$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Harvey, Jennet M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Klerk, Nicholas H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sterrett, Gregory F.</creatorcontrib><title>Histological grading in breast cancer: interobserver agreement, and relation to other prognostic factors including ploidy</title><title>Pathology</title><addtitle>Pathology</addtitle><description>Sections of neoplasms from 76 female patients with primary operable carcinoma of the breast were independently assessed by 2 pathologists for histological features and assigned a grade score. Relative disagreement rates between pathologists were estimated by use of a log-linear model and found to be similar to those reported by many other groups, but higher than that reported by acknowledged experts. Tumor grade was related to nuclear DNA content as measured by static cytometry, inversely related to oestrogen receptor status and provided some additional prognostic information but, in this small series of patients, did not correlate with short-term survival as closely as other prognostic indicators such as ploidy, tumor size or the extent of lymph node involvement. Patients with Grade III tumors had a particularly poor prognosis, however, there were few patients allotted to Grade III (poorly differentiated tumors), and survival differences between Grades I and II were small; in short-term followup, used alone, grading separated out only a small proportion of patients into useful prognostic groups.
This preliminary study emphasizes the need for a careful approach to the use of grading of breast carcinomas in the routine histopathology laboratory. Demonstration of higher levels of interobserver agreement, or concordance with experts in the field, will be necessary before our grading can be incorporated into a prognostic index useful for patient management.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Breast cancer</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Carcinoma - pathology</subject><subject>Cell Nucleus - pathology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Histological Techniques</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>inter-observer agreement</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Mitosis</subject><subject>Observer Variation</subject><subject>Ploidies</subject><subject>ploidy</subject><subject>Prognosis</subject><subject>Receptors, Estrogen - analysis</subject><subject>tumor grade</subject><issn>0031-3025</issn><issn>1465-3931</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1992</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1r3DAQhkVoSbdpf0APBZ16ilN9eu32VEKaFAK9tGczlsdeBVvajuTA_vsq2YUeCjkIwbwfjB4x9kGKKy1F-1kILbVQrRKtqHWt7BnbSFPbSrdavmKbJ70qBvuGvU3pQQhhmqY5Z-eyNlLVasMOdz7lOMfJO5j5RDD4MHEfeE8IKXMHwSF9KZOMFPuE9IjEYSLEBUO-5BAGTjhD9jHwHHnMu2LYU5xCTNk7PoLLkVJpcPP63L6fox8O79jrEeaE70_3Bfv9_ebX9V11__P2x_W3-8oZIXLVyL63SuCga9u3g7GgbDuUAwobo6zopdPajrUebbs1VikzWgmmRwE1lPEF-3TsLTv9WTHlbvHJ4TxDwLimbltIqmZrilEejY5iSoRjtye_AB06Kbon3N1_uEvm46l87Rcc_iWOfIv-9aj7MEZaYIcw550Dwu4hrhTKw19sP6Wx8Hn0SF1yHsuHDJ7Q5W6I_oX0Xw9woNs</recordid><startdate>1992</startdate><enddate>1992</enddate><creator>Harvey, Jennet M.</creator><creator>de Klerk, Nicholas H.</creator><creator>Sterrett, Gregory F.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Informa UK Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>1992</creationdate><title>Histological grading in breast cancer: interobserver agreement, and relation to other prognostic factors including ploidy</title><author>Harvey, Jennet M. ; de Klerk, Nicholas H. ; Sterrett, Gregory F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-81bb520ed365b9d45a259d259a2e84250b1c335f63f59745224f51a4be0a6af63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1992</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Breast cancer</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Carcinoma - pathology</topic><topic>Cell Nucleus - pathology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Histological Techniques</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>inter-observer agreement</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Mitosis</topic><topic>Observer Variation</topic><topic>Ploidies</topic><topic>ploidy</topic><topic>Prognosis</topic><topic>Receptors, Estrogen - analysis</topic><topic>tumor grade</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Harvey, Jennet M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Klerk, Nicholas H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sterrett, Gregory F.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Pathology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Harvey, Jennet M.</au><au>de Klerk, Nicholas H.</au><au>Sterrett, Gregory F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Histological grading in breast cancer: interobserver agreement, and relation to other prognostic factors including ploidy</atitle><jtitle>Pathology</jtitle><addtitle>Pathology</addtitle><date>1992</date><risdate>1992</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>63</spage><epage>68</epage><pages>63-68</pages><issn>0031-3025</issn><eissn>1465-3931</eissn><abstract>Sections of neoplasms from 76 female patients with primary operable carcinoma of the breast were independently assessed by 2 pathologists for histological features and assigned a grade score. Relative disagreement rates between pathologists were estimated by use of a log-linear model and found to be similar to those reported by many other groups, but higher than that reported by acknowledged experts. Tumor grade was related to nuclear DNA content as measured by static cytometry, inversely related to oestrogen receptor status and provided some additional prognostic information but, in this small series of patients, did not correlate with short-term survival as closely as other prognostic indicators such as ploidy, tumor size or the extent of lymph node involvement. Patients with Grade III tumors had a particularly poor prognosis, however, there were few patients allotted to Grade III (poorly differentiated tumors), and survival differences between Grades I and II were small; in short-term followup, used alone, grading separated out only a small proportion of patients into useful prognostic groups.
This preliminary study emphasizes the need for a careful approach to the use of grading of breast carcinomas in the routine histopathology laboratory. Demonstration of higher levels of interobserver agreement, or concordance with experts in the field, will be necessary before our grading can be incorporated into a prognostic index useful for patient management.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>1641262</pmid><doi>10.3109/00313029209063625</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0031-3025 |
ispartof | Pathology, 1992, Vol.24 (2), p.63-68 |
issn | 0031-3025 1465-3931 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_73102874 |
source | Taylor & Francis; MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Breast cancer Breast Neoplasms - pathology Carcinoma - pathology Cell Nucleus - pathology Female Histological Techniques Humans inter-observer agreement Middle Aged Mitosis Observer Variation Ploidies ploidy Prognosis Receptors, Estrogen - analysis tumor grade |
title | Histological grading in breast cancer: interobserver agreement, and relation to other prognostic factors including ploidy |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T03%3A45%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Histological%20grading%20in%20breast%20cancer:%20interobserver%20agreement,%20and%20relation%20to%20other%20prognostic%20factors%20including%20ploidy&rft.jtitle=Pathology&rft.au=Harvey,%20Jennet%20M.&rft.date=1992&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=63&rft.epage=68&rft.pages=63-68&rft.issn=0031-3025&rft.eissn=1465-3931&rft_id=info:doi/10.3109/00313029209063625&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E73102874%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=73102874&rft_id=info:pmid/1641262&rft_els_id=S0031302516358482&rfr_iscdi=true |