TY - JOUR
T1 - Interactive digital slides with heat maps: A novel method to improve the reproducibility of Gleason grading
AU - Egevad, Lars
AU - Algaba, Ferran
AU - Berney, Daniel M.
AU - Boccon-Gibod, Liliane
AU - Compérat, Eva
AU - Evans, Andrew J.
AU - Grobholz, Rainer
AU - Kristiansen, Glen
AU - Langner, Cord
AU - Lockwood, Gina
AU - Lopez-Beltran, Antonio
AU - Montironi, Rodolfo
AU - Oliveira, Pedro
AU - Schwenkglenks, Matthias
AU - Vainer, Ben
AU - Varma, Murali
AU - Verger, Vincent
AU - Camparo, Philippe
PY - 2011/8/1
Y1 - 2011/8/1
N2 - 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. © 2011 Springer-Verlag.
AB - 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. © 2011 Springer-Verlag.
KW - Biopsy
KW - Consensus
KW - Digital pathology
KW - Gleason grading
KW - Prostate cancer
KW - Reproducibility
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/80052403553
U2 - 10.1007/s00428-011-1106-x
DO - 10.1007/s00428-011-1106-x
M3 - Article
SN - 0945-6317
VL - 459
SP - 175
EP - 182
JO - Virchows Archiv
JF - Virchows Archiv
IS - 2
ER -
