Histopathological diagnosis of pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia and intraductal papillary-mucinous neoplasms:: Interobserver agreement

被引:70
作者
Longnecker, DS [1 ]
Adsay, NV
Fernandez-del Castillo, C
Hruban, RH
Kasugai, T
Klimstra, DS
Klöppel, G
Lüttges, J
Memoli, VA
Tosteson, TD
Yanagisawa, A
Wilentz, R
Zamboni, G
机构
[1] Dartmouth Hitchcock Med Ctr, Dept Pathol, Lebanon, NH 03756 USA
[2] Wayne State Univ, Dept Pathol, Detroit, MI 48202 USA
[3] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Surg, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[4] Johns Hopkins Med Inst, Sol Goldman Ctr Pancreat Canc Res, Dept Pathol & Oncol, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
[5] Osaka Kouseinenkin Hosp, Dept Pathol, Osaka, Japan
[6] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Pathol, New York, NY 10021 USA
[7] Univ Kiel, Dept Pathol, D-2300 Kiel, Germany
[8] Dartmouth Hitchcock Med Ctr, Dept Community & Family Med, Lebanon, NH 03756 USA
[9] Kyoto Prefectural Univ Med, Dept Pathol, Kyoto 602, Japan
[10] Skin & Canc Associates, Pathol Lab, Hallandale, FL USA
[11] Univ Verona, Dept Pathol, I-37100 Verona, Italy
关键词
intraductal papillary-mucinous neoplasm; pancreatic carcinoma; PanIN;
D O I
10.1097/01.mpa.0000186245.35716.18
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: The goal of this study was to evaluate the consistency of distinction between pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) and intraductal papillary-mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) and the hypothesis that guidelines for their distinction might be inadequate. Methods: A group of 93 pancreas specimens from surgical resections or autopsies that contained lesions consistent with histopathological diagnoses of PanIN-1A, PanIN-1B, PanIN-2, or IPMN ( adenoma or borderline) was collected. The classification of these neoplasms by 6 pathologists, 2 from Europe, 2 from Japan, and 2 from the United States, was compared. The pathologists initially used guidelines current in their practice and then reviewed 47 of the 93 specimens a second time using new consensus definitions and guidelines for PanIN and IPMN that were developed in 2003. Results: The initial comparison showed frequent disagreement regarding both category and grade of the lesions. Agreement was greater for category than grade. In the second review, agreement among the 6 reviewers improved, remaining higher for category, although disagreements persisted for both category and grade. Conclusions: We conclude that the new definitions of PanIN and IPMN improve the consistency in classifying these lesions, but additional work is needed to further improve the reproducibility of their classification.
引用
收藏
页码:344 / 349
页数:6
相关论文
共 35 条
[11]  
Japan Pancreas Society, 1996, CLASS PANCR CARC
[12]  
Japan Pancreas Society, 2003, Classification of pancreatic carcinoma
[13]  
Klöppel G, 1998, HEPATO-GASTROENTEROL, V45, P1981
[14]  
Kloppel G, 1996, HISTOLOGIC TYPING TU
[15]   The pathology of ductal-type pancreatic carcinomas and pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia: Insights for clinicians [J].
Klöppel G. ;
Lüttges J. .
Current Gastroenterology Reports, 2004, 6 (2) :111-118
[16]  
LANDIS JR, 1977, BIOMETRICS, V33, P174
[17]  
Lüttges J, 1999, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V85, P1703
[18]   The mucin profile of noninvasive and invasive mucinous cystic neoplasms of the pancreas [J].
Lüttges, J ;
Feyerabend, B ;
Buchelt, T ;
Pacena, M ;
Klöppel, G .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY, 2002, 26 (04) :466-471
[19]  
Lüttges J, 2001, AM J SURG PATHOL, V25, P942
[20]   Duct changes and K-ras mutations in the disease-free pancreas:: analysis of type, age relation and spatial distribution [J].
Lüttges, J ;
Reinecke-Lüthge, A ;
Möllmann, B ;
Menke, MAOH ;
Clemens, A ;
Klimpfinger, M ;
Sipos, B ;
Klöppel, G .
VIRCHOWS ARCHIV, 1999, 435 (05) :461-468