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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pathology 1992, Vol.24 (2), p.63-68
Hauptverfasser: Harvey, Jennet M., de Klerk, Nicholas H., Sterrett, Gregory F.
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 &amp; 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