14 research outputs found

    Interobserver variation in the classification of tumor deposits in rectal cancer – is the use of histopathological characteristics the way to go?

    Get PDF
    The focus on lymph node metastases (LNM) as the most important prognostic marker in colorectal cancer (CRC) has been challenged by the finding that other types of locoregional spread, including tumor deposits (TDs), extramural venous invasion (EMVI), and perineural invasion (PNI), also have significant impact. However, there are concerns about interobserver variation when differentiating between these features. Therefore, this study analyzed interobserver agreement between pathologists when assessing routine tumor nodules based on TNM 8. Electronic slides of 50 tumor nodules that were not treated with neoadjuvant therapy were reviewed by 8 gastrointestinal pathologists. They were asked to classify each nodule as TD, LNM, EMVI, or PNI, and to list which histological discriminatory features were present. There was overall agreement of 73.5% (Îș 0.38, 95%-CI 0.33–0.43) if a nodal versus non-nodal classification was used, and 52.2% (Îș 0.27, 95%-CI 0.23–0.31) if EMVI and PNI were classified separately. The interobserver agreement varied significantly between discriminatory features from Îș 0.64 (95%-CI 0.58–0.70) for roundness to Îș 0.26 (95%-CI 0.12–0.41) for a lone arteriole sign, and the presence of discriminatory features did not always correlate with the final classification. Since extranodal pathways of spread are prognostically relevant, classification of tumor nodules is important. There is currently no evidence for the prognostic relevance of the origin of TD, and although some histopathological characteristics showed good interobserver agreement, these are often non-specific. To optimize interobserver agreement, we recommend a binary classification of nodal versus extranodal tumor nodules which is based on prognostic evidence and yields good overall agreement

    Interobserver variation in the classification of tumor deposits in rectal cancer-is the use of histopathological characteristics the way to go?

    Get PDF
    The focus on lymph node metastases (LNM) as the most important prognostic marker in colorectal cancer (CRC) has been challenged by the finding that other types of locoregional spread, including tumor deposits (TDs), extramural venous invasion (EMVI), and perineural invasion (PNI), also have significant impact. However, there are concerns about interobserver variation when differentiating between these features. Therefore, this study analyzed interobserver agreement between pathologists when assessing routine tumor nodules based on TNM 8. Electronic slides of 50 tumor nodules that were not treated with neoadjuvant therapy were reviewed by 8 gastrointestinal pathologists. They were asked to classify each nodule as TD, LNM, EMVI, or PNI, and to list which histological discriminatory features were present. There was overall agreement of 73.5% (Îș 0.38, 95%-CI 0.33–0.43) if a nodal versus non-nodal classification was used, and 52.2% (Îș 0.27, 95%-CI 0.23–0.31) if EMVI and PNI were classified separately. The interobserver agreement varied significantly between discriminatory features from Îș 0.64 (95%-CI 0.58–0.70) for roundness to Îș 0.26 (95%-CI 0.12–0.41) for a lone arteriole sign, and the presence of discriminatory features did not always correlate with the final classification. Since extranodal pathways of spread are prognostically relevant, classification of tumor nodules is important. There is currently no evidence for the prognostic relevance of the origin of TD, and although some histopathological characteristics showed good interobserver agreement, these are often non-specific. To optimize interobserver agreement, we recommend a binary classification of nodal versus extranodal tumor nodules which is based on prognostic evidence and yields good overall agreement

    Clinical lymph node staging in colorectal cancer; a flip of the coin?

    No full text
    Contains fulltext : 194420.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access

    The Clinical Frailty Scale is a useful tool for predicting postoperative complications following elective colon cancer surgery at the age of 80 years and above: A prospective, multicentre observational study

    No full text
    Aim Identification of the risks of postoperative complications may be challenging in older patients with heterogeneous physical and cognitive status. The aim of this multicentre, observational study was to identify variables that affect the outcomes of colon cancer surgery and, especially, to find tools to quantify the risks related to surgery. Method Patients aged >= 80 years with electively operated Stage I-III colon cancer were recruited. The prospectively collected data included comorbidities, results of the onco-geriatric screening tool (G8), Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF), and operative and postoperative outcomes. Results A total of 161 patients (mean 84.5 years, range 80-97, 60% female) were included. History of cerebral stroke (64% vs. 37%, p = 0.02), albumin level 31-34 g/l compared with >= 35 g/l (57% vs. 32%, p = 0.007), CFS 3-4 and 5-9 compared with CFS 1-2 (49% and 47% vs. 16%, respectively) and American Society of Anesthesiologists score >3 (77% vs. 28%, P = 0.006) were related to a higher risk of complications. In multivariate logistic regression analysis CFS >= 3 (OR 6.06, 95% CI 1.88-19.5, p = 0.003) and albumin level 31-34 g/l (OR 3.88, 1.61-9.38, p = 0.003) were significantly associated with postoperative complications. Severe complications were more common in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (43% vs. 13%, p = 0.047), renal failure (25% vs. 12%, p = 0.021), albumin level 31-34 g/l (26% vs. 8%, p = 0.014) and CCI >6 (23% vs. 10%, p = 0.034). Conclusion Surgery on physically and cognitively fit aged colon cancer patients with CFS 1-2 can lead to excellent operative outcomes similar to those of younger patients. The CFS could be a useful screening tool for predicting postoperative complications.Peer reviewe
    corecore