Improving the reproducibility of diagnosing micrometastases and isolated tumor cells

被引:104
作者
Cserni, G
Bianchi, S
Boecker, W
Decker, T
Lacerda, M
Rank, F
Wells, CA
机构
[1] Bacs Kiskun Cty Teaching Hosp, Dept Pathol, H-6000 Kecskemet, Hungary
[2] Univ Florence, Dept Human Pathol & Oncol, Florence, Italy
[3] Univ Munster, Gerhard Domagk Inst Pathol, D-4400 Munster, Germany
[4] HELIOS Med Ctr, Breast Unit, Dept Pathol, Berlin, Germany
[5] Ctr Reg Oncol Coimbra, Lab Histopatol, Coimbra, Portugal
[6] Univ Copenhagen Hosp, Rigshosp, Dept Pathol, Ctr Lab Med & Pathol, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
[7] St Bartholomews Hosp, Sch Med, Dept Histopathol, London, England
关键词
immunohistochemistry; isolated tumor cells; kappa statistics; micrometastasis; sentinel lymph node; tumor-lymphnode-metastasis (TNM);
D O I
10.1002/cncr.20760
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND. The latest edition of the tumor-lymph node-metastasis (TNM) classification of malignant tumors distinguishes between isolated tumor cells (pN0) and micrometastases (pN1mi). The reproducibility of these categories has not been assessed previously. METHODS. Digital images from 50 cases with low-volume lymph node involvement from axillary sentinel lymph nodes were circulated twice for evaluation (Evaluation Rounds 1 and 2) among the members of the European Working Group for Breast Screening Pathology, and the members were asked to categorize lesions as micrometastasis, isolated tumor cells, or something else and to classify each case into a pathologic lymph node (pN) category of the pathologic TNM system. Methods for improving the low reproducibility of the categorizations were discussed between the two evaluation rounds. K Statistics were used for the assessment of interobserver variability. RESULTS. The K value for the consistency of categorizing low-volume lymph node load into micro metastasis, isolated tumor cells, or neither of those changed from 0.39 to 0.49 between Evaluation Rounds 1 and 2, but it was slightly lower for the pN categories (0.35 and 0.44, respectively). Interpretation of the definitions of isolated tumor cells (especially with respect to their localization within the lymph node), lack of guidance on how to measure them if they were multiple, and lack of any definitions for multiple simultaneous foci of lymph node involvement were listed among the causes of discordant diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS. The results of the current study indicated that the definitions available have minor contradictions and do not permit a reproducible distinction between micrometastases and isolated tumor cells. Refinement of these definitions, therefore, is required. One refinement that may improve reproducibility is suggested in this report. (C) 2004 American Cancer Society.
引用
收藏
页码:358 / 367
页数:10
相关论文
共 25 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1997, AJCC CANC STAGING MA
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2001, European guidelines for quality assurance in mammography screening
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2002, AJCC CANC STAGING HD
  • [4] Pathological work-up of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer. Review of current data to be considered for the formulation of guidelines
    Cserni, G
    Amendoeira, I
    Apostolikas, N
    Bellocq, JP
    Bianchi, S
    Bussolati, G
    Boecker, W
    Borisch, B
    Connolly, CE
    Decker, T
    Dervan, P
    Drijkoningen, M
    Ellis, IO
    Elston, CW
    Eusebi, V
    Faverly, D
    Heikkila, P
    Holland, R
    Kerner, H
    Kulka, J
    Jacquemier, J
    Lacerda, M
    Martinez-Penuela, J
    De Miguel, C
    Peterse, JL
    Rank, F
    Regitnig, P
    Reiner, A
    Sapino, A
    Sigal-Zafrani, B
    Tanous, AM
    Thorstenson, S
    Zozaya, E
    Wells, CA
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2003, 39 (12) : 1654 - 1667
  • [5] Discrepancies in current practice of pathological evaluation of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer. Results of a questionnaire based survey by the European Working Group for Breast Screening Pathology
    Cserni, G
    Amendoeira, I
    Apostolikas, N
    Bellocq, JP
    Bianchi, S
    Boecker, W
    Borisch, B
    Connolly, CE
    Decker, T
    Dervan, P
    Drijkoningen, M
    Ellis, IO
    Elston, CW
    Eusebi, V
    Faverly, D
    Heikkila, P
    Holland, R
    Kerner, H
    Kulka, J
    Jacquemier, J
    Lacerda, M
    Martinez-Penuela, J
    De Miguel, C
    Peterse, JL
    Rank, F
    Regitnig, P
    Reiner, A
    Sapino, A
    Sigal-Zafrani, B
    Tanous, AM
    Thorstenson, S
    Zozaya, E
    Fejes, G
    Wells, CA
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 2004, 57 (07) : 695 - 701
  • [6] Fleiss J. L, 1981, STAT METHODS RATES P, P212
  • [7] The process for continuous improvement of the TNM classification
    Gospodarowicz, MK
    Miller, D
    Groome, PA
    Greene, FL
    Logan, PA
    Sobin, LH
    [J]. CANCER, 2004, 100 (01) : 1 - 5
  • [8] The TNM system: Our language for cancer care
    Greene, FL
    Sobin, LH
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2002, 80 (03) : 119 - 120
  • [9] Hermanek P, 1999, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V86, P2668, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19991215)86:12<2668::AID-CNCR11>3.3.CO
  • [10] 2-I