Reproducibility of tumor budding assessment in pancreatic cancer based on a multicenter interobserver study
-
Published:2020-12-17
Issue:4
Volume:478
Page:719-726
-
ISSN:0945-6317
-
Container-title:Virchows Archiv
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Virchows Arch
Author:
Karamitopoulou EvaORCID, Esposito Irene, Zlobec Inti, Insilla Andrea Cacciato, Wartenberg Martin, Schaeffer David F., Kalloger Steve, La Rosa Stefano, Sempoux Christine, Ramos Centeno Irene, Lohneis Philipp
Abstract
AbstractTumor budding has been reported to be an independent prognostic factor in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Its use in daily diagnostics would improve the prognostic stratification of patients. We performed a multicenter interobserver study to test various budding assessment methods for their reproducibility. Two serial sections of 50 resected, treatment-naïve PDACs were stained for Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) and pancytokeratin. Tumor budding was scored by independent observers at five participating centers in Switzerland, Germany, and Canada. Pathologists assessed tumor budding on a digital platform comparing H&E with pancytokeratin staining in 10 high-power fields (10HPF) and one HPF hotspot (1HPF). Additionally, tumor budding was assessed in one H&E hotspot at × 20 magnification, as suggested by the International Tumor Budding Consensus Conference (ITBCC). Correlation coefficients for bud counts between centers ranged from r = 0.58648 to r = 0.78641 for H&E and from r = 0.69288 to r = 0.81764 for pancytokeratin. The highest interobserver agreement across all centers was observed for pancytokeratin 10HPFs (ICC = 0.6). ICC values were 0.49, 0.48, 0.41, and 0.4 for H&E in 1HPF hotspot, H&E in 10HPFs, pancytokeratin in 1HPF, and H&E in one hotspot at ×20, respectively (ITBCC method). This interobserver study reveals a range between moderately poor to moderate agreement levels between pathologists for the different tumor budding assessment methods in PDAC. Acceptable levels of agreement were reached with the pancytokeratin 10HPF method, which can thus be recommended for the assessment of tumor budding in PDAC resection specimens. To improve the levels of interobserver agreement, the implementation of machine learning applications should be considered.
Funder
University of Bern
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Cell Biology,Molecular Biology,General Medicine,Pathology and Forensic Medicine
Reference31 articles.
1. Rahib L, Smith BD, Aizenberg R, Rosenzweig AB, Fleshman JM, Matrisian LM (2014) Projecting cancer incidence and deaths to 2030: the unexpected burden of thyroid, liver, and pancreas cancers in the United States. Cancer Res 74:2913–2921 2. Ryan DP, Hong TS, Bardeesy N (2014) Pancreatic adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med 371:2140–2141 3. Bahra M, Pratschke J, Klein F, Neuhaus P, Boas-Knoop S, Puhl G, Denecke T, Pullankavumkal JR, Sinn M, Riess H, Pelzer U (2015) Cytoreductive surgery for pancreatic cancer improves overall outcome of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. Pancreas 44:930–936 4. Conroy T, Hammel P, Hebbar M, Ben Abdelghani M, Wei AC, Raoul JL, Choné L, Francois E, Artru P, Biagi JJ, Lecomte T, Assenat E, Faroux R, Ychou M, Volet J, Sauvanet A, Breysacher G, di Fiore F, Cripps C, Kavan P, Texereau P, Bouhier-Leporrier K, Khemissa-Akouz F, Legoux JL, Juzyna B, Gourgou S, O’Callaghan CJ, Jouffroy-Zeller C, Rat P, Malka D, Castan F, Bachet JB (2018) FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine as adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med 379:2395–2406 5. Oettle H, Neuhaus P, Hochhaus A, Hartmann JT, Gellert K, Ridwelski K, Niedergethmann M, Zülke C, Fahlke J, Arning MB, Sinn M, Hinke A, Riess H (2013) Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and long-term outcomes among patients with resected pancreatic cancer: the CONKO-001 randomized trial. JAMA 310:1473–1481
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|