Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Nonneoplastic Lesions in Toxicology Studies

Author:

Shackelford Cynthia1,Long Gerald2,Wolf Jeffrey3,Okerberg Carlin3,Herbert Ronald4

Affiliation:

1. Experimental Pathology Laboratories, Inc, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709,

2. Eli Lilly & Company Lilly Research Laboratories, Greenfi eld, Indiana, 46140

3. Experimental Pathology Laboratories, Inc, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709

4. National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27709

Abstract

A pathology report is written to convey information concerning the pathologic findings in a study. This type of report must be complete, accurate and communicate the relative importance of various findings in a study. The overall quality of the report is determined by three Quality Indicators: thoroughness, accuracy, and consistency. Thoroughness is the identification of every lesion present in a particular organ or tissue, including spontaneous background lesions. Experienced pathologists familiar with background lesions may disregard certain types of lesions or establish a threshold or a severity above which background lesions are diagnosed. Accuracy is the ability to make, and precisely communicate, correct diagnoses. Nomenclature of lesions is a matter of definition and experienced pathologists generally agree as to what terms are to be used. Consistency is the uniform use of a specific term to record a defined lesion and implies that the same diagnostic criteria are being followed for each type of diagnosis. The relative severity of nonneoplastic lesions can be recorded either semiquantitatively or quantitatively. Semiquantitative analysis involves the application of defined severity grades or ranges for specific lesions. Quantitative analysis (counts and measurements) can be performed manually or electronically, utilizing image analysis and stereological techniques to provide numerical values. When both qualitative and quantitative parameters are applied in preparation of a pathology report, the recorded pathology findings can be interpreted and put into perspective. The use of this approach assures a reader that the pathology report meets the highest standards.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Cell Biology,Toxicology,Molecular Biology,Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Reference18 articles.

1. Boorman GA, Eustis SL (1986). The pathology working group as a means for assuring pathology quality in toxicological studies. In: Managing Conduct and Data Quality of Toxicology Studies. Hover KB, Baldwin JK, Velner AF, Whitmire CE, Davies CL, Bristol DW (eds). Princeton, NJ, pp 271—275.

2. Evaluation of Altered Morphology

3. Glaister JR (1986). Methods in pathology and general pathology. In: Principles of Toxicological Pathology. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 1—50.

4. Harada T., Enomoto A., Boorman GA, Maronpot RR (1999). Liver and gall-bladder. In: Pathology of the Mouse, Maronpot RR (ed). Cache River Press, IL, pp 130—131.

5. Factors Influencing Laboratory Animal Spontaneous Tumor Profiles

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3