Reproducibility of the diagnosis of atypical endometrial hyperplasia A gynecologic oncology group study

Most gynecologists determine therapy based on current International Society of Gynecologic Pathologists (ISGP)/World Health Organization classification of endometrial hyperplasia, the reproducibility of which has been questioned. The Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) initiated a protocol to assess th...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Cancer Ročník 106; číslo 4; s. 804 - 811
Hlavní autoři: Zaino, Richard J., Kauderer, James, Trimble, Cornelia Liu, Silverberg, Steven G., Curtin, John P., Lim, Peter C., Gallup, Donald G.
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: United States 15.02.2006
Témata:
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Endometrial Hyperplasia - classification
Endometrial Hyperplasia - diagnosis
Endometrial Hyperplasia - pathology
Female
Gynecology - standards
Humans
Middle Aged
Observer Variation
Pathology - standards
Prognosis
Prospective Studies
Referral and Consultation
Reproducibility of Results
ISSN:0008-543X, 1097-0142
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:Most gynecologists determine therapy based on current International Society of Gynecologic Pathologists (ISGP)/World Health Organization classification of endometrial hyperplasia, the reproducibility of which has been questioned. The Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) initiated a protocol to assess the efficacy of hormonal therapy of atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH). Primary goals of the first phase (Part A) were to prospectively determine reproducibility of referring institution's pathologist's diagnosis of AEH by a panel of 3 gynecologic pathologists and to determine reproducibility of diagnoses by panel members. Three hundred six women were entered on this protocol with a referring institution's pathologist diagnosis of AEH based on biopsy or curettage. Available slides were assessed independently and interpreted by each of a panel of 3 gynecologic pathologists who used International Society of Gynecologic Pathologists (ISGP)/World Health Organization criteria. The majority diagnosis was based on diagnostic concordance by at least 2 of the 3 panelists. The referring institution's pathologist's diagnosis of AEH was supported by the majority of the panel in only 38% of cases. Overall kappa value for the panel diagnosis of AEH was 0.28. The majority diagnosis was adenocarcinoma in 29%, cycling endometrium in 7%, and nonatypical hyperplasia in 18% of cases. Unanimous agreement for any diagnosis was reached among all 3 of the panel in 40% of cases. For the panel, paired kappa values for any diagnosis ranged 0.34-0.43, with an overall kappa value of 0.40. Reproducibility of referring institution's pathologists' diagnosis of AEH by a panel of gynecologic pathologists is poor. Both underestimation and overestimation of the severity of the lesion are very common. The level of reproducibility among subspecialist panel members for diagnosis of AEH in these specimens also is poor. Better criteria and better sampling are needed to improve reproducibility of this diagnosis, particularly if it is to be used for clinical decisions.
Bibliografie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
ISSN:0008-543X
1097-0142
DOI:10.1002/cncr.21649