Document Detail


Reproducibility of endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia diagnosis is good, but influenced by the diagnostic style of pathologists.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  22301705     Owner:  NLM     Status:  Publisher    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
Endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia (EIN) applies specific diagnostic criteria to designate a monoclonal endometrial preinvasive glandular proliferation known from previous studies to confer a 45-fold increased risk for endometrial cancer. In this international study we estimate accuracy and precision of EIN diagnosis among 20 reviewing pathologists in different practice environments, and with differing levels of experience and training. Sixty-two endometrial biopsies diagnosed as benign, EIN, or adenocarcinoma by consensus of two expert subspecialty pathologists were used as a reference comparison to assess diagnostic accuracy of 20 reviewing pathologists. Interobserver reproducibility among the 20 reviewers provided a measure of diagnostic precision. Before evaluating cases, observers were self-trained by reviewing published textbook and/or online EIN diagnostic guidelines. Demographics of the reviewing pathologists, and their impressions regarding implementation of EIN terminology were recorded. Seventy-nine percent of the 20 reviewing pathologists' diagnoses were exactly concordant with the expert consensus (accuracy). The interobserver weighted κ values of 3-class EIN scheme (benign, EIN, carcinoma) diagnoses between expert consensus and each of reviewing pathologists averaged 0.72 (reproducibility, or precision). Reviewing pathologists demonstrated one of three diagnostic styles, which varied in the repertoire of diagnoses commonly used, and their nonrandom response to potentially confounding diagnostic features such as endometrial polyp, altered differentiation, background hormonal effects, and technically poor preparations. EIN diagnostic strategies can be learned and implemented from standard teaching materials with a high degree of reproducibility, but is impacted by the personal diagnostic style of each pathologist in responding to potential diagnostic confounders.Modern Pathology advance online publication, 3 February 2012; doi:10.1038/modpathol.2011.220.
Authors:
Alp Usubutun; George L Mutter; Arzu Saglam; Anil Dolgun; Eylem Akar Ozkan; Tan Ince; Aytekin Akyol; H Dilek Bulbul; Zerrin Calay; Funda Eren; Derya Gumurdulu; A Nihan Haberal; Sennur Ilvan; Seyda Karaveli; Meral Koyuncuoglu; Bahar Muezzinoglu; Kamil H Muftuoglu; Necmettin Ozdemir; Ozlem Ozen; Sema Baykara; Elif Pestereli; Emine Cagnur Ulukus; Osman Zekioglu
Related Documents :
22837315 - Serratia marcescens necrotizing fasciitis presenting as bilateral breast necrosis.
22633885 - A structured approach to documenting a search strategy for publication: a 12 step guide...
17124645 - Bupropion in atopic dermatitis.
16633495 - Menstrual psychosis.
21034925 - Pilonidal cyst involving the clitoris in an 8-year-old girl--a case report and literatu...
10965305 - Recurrent aggressive angiomyxoma of the urinary bladder. case report and review of the ...
Publication Detail:
Type:  JOURNAL ARTICLE     Date:  2012-2-03
Journal Detail:
Title:  Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc     Volume:  -     ISSN:  1530-0285     ISO Abbreviation:  -     Publication Date:  2012 Feb 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2012-2-3     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  8806605     Medline TA:  Mod Pathol     Country:  -    
Other Details:
Languages:  ENG     Pagination:  -     Citation Subset:  -    
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Semi-quantitative immunohistochemical assay versus oncotype DX(®) qRT-PCR assay for estrogen and pro...
Next Document:  Inclusion and Exclusion in Nutrigenetics Clinical Research: Ethical and Scientific Challenges.