Interactive digital slides with heat maps: a novel method to improve the reproducibility of Gleason grading

被引：52

作者：

Egevad, Lars ^{[1
]}

Algaba, Ferran ^{[2
]}

Berney, Daniel M. ^{[3
]}

Boccon-Gibod, Liliane ^{[4
]}

Comperat, Eva ^{[5
]}

Evans, Andrew J. ^{[6
]}

Grobholz, Rainer ^{[7
]}

Kristiansen, Glen ^{[8
]}

Langner, Cord ^{[9
]}

Lockwood, Gina ^{[10
]}

Lopez-Beltran, Antonio ^{[11
]}

Montironi, Rodolfo ^{[12
]}

Oliveira, Pedro ^{[13
]}

Schwenkglenks, Matthias ^{[14
]}

Vainer, Ben ^{[15
]}

Varma, Murali ^{[16
]}

Verger, Vincent ^{[17
]}

Camparo, Philippe ^{[18
]}

机构：

[1] Karolinska Univ Hosp, Karolinska Inst, Dept Oncol Pathol, S-17176 Stockholm, Sweden

[2] Fundacio Puigvert Univ Autonomous, Barcelona, Spain

[3] Univ London, St Bartholomews Hosp, Inst Canc, London, England

[4] Hop Armand Trousseau, Paris, France

[5] Hop La Pitie Salpetriere, Paris, France

[6] Univ Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

[7] Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland

[8] Univ Zurich Hosp, CH-8091 Zurich, Switzerland

[9] Med Univ Graz, Graz, Austria

[10] Canadian Partnership Against Canc, Toronto, ON, Canada

[11] Univ Cordoba, Sch Med, Cordoba, Spain

[12] Polytech Univ Marche Reg, Ancona, Italy

[13] Hosp Luz, Lisbon, Portugal

[14] Univ Basel, Basel, Switzerland

[15] Rigshosp, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark

[16] Univ Wales Hosp, Cardiff CF4 4XW, S Glam, Wales

[17] CCITI, Dijon, France

[18] Hop Foch, Paris, France

来源：

VIRCHOWS ARCHIV | 2011年 / 459卷 / 02期

关键词：

Prostate cancer; Biopsy; Gleason grading; Digital pathology; Reproducibility; Consensus; PROSTATIC-CARCINOMA; INTERNATIONAL-SOCIETY; INTEROBSERVER REPRODUCIBILITY; CONSENSUS CONFERENCE; CANCER; BIOPSY; ACCURACY;

D O I：

10.1007/s00428-011-1106-x

中图分类号：

R36 [病理学];

学科分类号：

100103 [病原生物学];

摘要：

Our aims were to analyze reporting of Gleason pattern (GP) 3 and 4 prostate cancer with the ISUP 2005 Gleason grading and to collect consensus cases for standardization. We scanned 25 prostate biopsy cores diagnosed as Gleason score (GS) 6-7. Fifteen genitourinary pathologists graded the digital slides and circled GP 4 and 5 in a slide viewer. Grading difficulty was scored as 1-3. GP 4 components were classified as type 1 (cribriform), 2 (fused), or 3 (poorly formed glands). A GS of 5-6, 7 (3 + 4), 7 (4 + 3), and 8-9 was given in 29%, 41%, 19%, and 10% (mean GS 6.84, range 6.44-7.36). In 15 cases, at least 67% of observers agreed on GS groups (consensus cases). Mean interobserver weighted kappa for GS groups was 0.43. Mean difficulty scores in consensus and non-consensus cases were 1.44 and 1.66 (p = 0.003). Pattern 4 types 1, 2, and 3 were seen in 28%, 86%, and 67% of GP 4. All three coexisted in 16% (11% and 23% in consensus and non-consensus cases, p = 0.03). Average estimated and calculated %GP 4/5 were 29% and 16%. After individual review, the experts met to analyze diagnostic difficulties. Areas of GP 4 and 5 were displayed as heat maps, which were helpful for identifying contentious areas. A key problem was to agree on minimal criteria for small foci of GP 4. In summary, the detection threshold for GP 4 in NBX needs to be better defined. This set of consensus cases may be useful for standardization.

引用

页码：175 / 182

页数：8

共 19 条

[1]

Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: Urologic pathologists [J].