Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMelia, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorMoseley, Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorBall, RYen_US
dc.contributor.authorGriffiths, DFRen_US
dc.contributor.authorGrigor, Ken_US
dc.contributor.authorHarnden, Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorJarmulowicz, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorMcWilliam, LJen_US
dc.contributor.authorMontironi, Ren_US
dc.contributor.authorWaller, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorMoss, Sen_US
dc.contributor.authorParkinson, MCen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-04T13:10:53Z
dc.date.issued2006-05en_US
dc.identifier6en_US
dc.identifier.citationHISTOPATHOLOGY, 2006, 48 pp. 644 - 654en_US
dc.identifier.issn0309-0167en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.icr.ac.uk/handle/internal/2552
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1365-2559.2006.02393.xen_US
dc.description.abstractAims: The frequency of prostatic core biopsies to detect cancer has been increasing with more widespread prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing. Gleason score has important implications for patient management but morphological reproducibility data for British practice are limited. Using literature-based criteria nine uropathologists took part in a reproducibility study. Methods: Each of the nine participants submitted slides from consecutive cases of biopsy-diagnosed cancer assigned to the Gleason score groups 2-4, 5-6, 7 and 8-10 in the original report. A random selection of slides was taken within each group and examined by all pathologists, who were blind to the original score. Over six circulations, new slides were mixed with previously read slides, resulting in a total of 47 of 81 slides being read more than once. Results: For the first readings of the 81 slides, the agreement with the consensus score was 78% and overall interobserver agreement was kappa 0.54 for Gleason score groups 2-4, 5-6, 7, 8-10. Kappa values for each category were 0.33, 0.56, 0.44 and 0.68, respectively. For the 47 slides read more than once, intra-observer agreement was 77%, kappa 0.66. The study identified problems in core biopsy interpretation of Gleason score at levels 2-4 and 7. Patterns illustrated by Gleason as 2 tended to be categorized as 3 because of the variable acinar size and unassessable lesional margin. In slides with consensus Gleason score 7, 13% of readings were scored 6 and in slides with consensus 6, 18% of readings were scored 7. Conclusions: Recommendations include the need to increase objectivity of the Gleason criteria but limits of descriptive morphology may have to be accepted.en_US
dc.format.extent644 - 654en_US
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoEnglishen_US
dc.publisherBLACKWELL PUBLISHINGen_US
dc.titleA UK-based investigation of inter- and intra-observer reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic biopsiesen_US
dc.typeJournal Article
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1111/j.1365-2559.2006.02393.xen_US
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2006-05en_US
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_US
dc.relation.isPartOfHISTOPATHOLOGYen_US
pubs.notesaffiliation: Melia, J (Reprint Author), Inst Canc Res, Canc Screening Evaluat Unit Epidemiol, Brookes Lawley Bldg,Cotswold Rd, Surrey SM2 5NG, England. Inst Canc Res, Canc Screening Evaluat Unit Epidemiol, Surrey SM2 5NG, England. Addenbrookes Hosp, Dept Histopathol, Cambridge, England. Norfolk & Norwich Univ Hosp, Dept Histopathol, Norwich, NY USA. Univ Wales Coll Cardiff, Dept Pathol, Cardiff CF1 1XL, S Glam, Wales. Western Gen Hosp, Dept Pathol, Edinburgh, Midlothian, Scotland. St James Hosp, Dept Histopathol, Leeds, W Yorkshire, England. Univ Coll Hosp, London, England. UCL, Inst Urol, London, England. keywords: biopsy; grade; observer variation; prostate carcinoma; reproducibility keywords-plus: RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY SPECIMENS; EXTERNAL-BEAM RADIATION; NEEDLE-BIOPSY; PROGNOSTIC-SIGNIFICANCE; PELVIC LYMPHADENECTOMY; GENERAL PATHOLOGISTS; OBSERVER VARIABILITY; FREE SURVIVAL; CANCER; BRACHYTHERAPY research-areas: Cell Biology; Pathology web-of-science-categories: Cell Biology; Pathology author-email: jane.melia@icr.ac.uk researcherid-numbers: Waller, Michael/R-6231-2016 orcid-numbers: Waller, Michael/0000-0002-1050-4574 funding-acknowledgement: Medical Research Council [G0501019] number-of-cited-references: 52 times-cited: 73 usage-count-last-180-days: 0 usage-count-since-2013: 8 journal-iso: Histopathology doc-delivery-number: 035PY unique-id: ISI:000237015000002 da: 2018-09-04en_US
pubs.notesNot knownen_US
pubs.organisational-group/ICR
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Closed research teams
pubs.organisational-group/ICR/Primary Group/ICR Divisions/Closed research teams/Cancer Screening Evaluation Unit (DoH)
pubs.volume48en_US
pubs.embargo.termsNot knownen_US
icr.researchteamCancer Screening Evaluation Unit (DoH)en_US
dc.contributor.icrauthorMoss, Susan Maryen_US
dc.contributor.icrauthorMelia, Janeen_US


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record