Reliability and validity of needle biopsy evaluation of breast-abnormalities using the B-categorization – design and objectives of the Diagnosis Optimisation Study (DIOS)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The planned nationwide implementation of mammography screening 2007 in Germany will increase the occurrence of mammographically detected breast abnormalities. These abnormalities are normally evaluated by minimal invasive core biopsy. To minimize false positive and false negative histological findings, quality assurance of the pathological evaluation of the biopsies is essential. Various guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer diagnosis recommend applying the B-classification for histopathological categorization. However, to date there are only few studies that reported results about reliability and validity of B-classification. Therefore, objectives of our study are to determine the inter- and intraobserver variability (reliability study) and construct and predictive validity (validity study) of core biopsy evaluation of breast abnormalities. This paper describes the design and objectives of the DIOS Study.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>All consecutive asymptomatic and symptomatic women with breast imaging abnormalities who are referred to the University Hospital of Halle for core breast biopsy over a period of 24 months are eligible. According to the sample size calculation we need 800 women for the study. All patients in the study population underwent clinical and radiological examination. Core biopsy is performed by stereotactic-, ultrasound- or magnetic resonance (MR) guided automated gun method or vacuum assisted method. The histopathologic agreement (intra- and interobserver) of pathologists and the histopathologic validity will be evaluated. Two reference standards are implemented, a reference pathologist and in case of suspicious or malignant findings the histopathologic result of excision biopsy. Furthermore, a self administrated questionnaire which contains questions about potential risk factors of breast cancer, is sent to the participants approximately two weeks after core biopsy. This enables us to run a case-control-analysis (woman with breast cancer histological verified after excision are defined as cases, woman without malignant breast lesions are defined as controls) to investigate the predictive values of various risk factors on breast cancer risk.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The analysis of reliability and validity of the histopathological evaluation of core biopsy specimens of breast abnormalities is intended to provide important information needed for a high quality in breast cancer diagnostic and for planning of treatment strategies.</p

Quality assurance in pathology in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis—European recommendations

In Europe, colorectal cancer is the most common newly diagnosed cancer and the second most common cause of cancer deaths, accounting for approximately 436,000 incident cases and 212,000 deaths in 2008. The potential of high-quality screening to improve control of the disease has been recognized by the Council of the European Union who issued a recommendation on cancer screening in 2003. Multidisciplinary, evidence-based European Guidelines for quality assurance in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis have recently been developed by experts in a pan-European project coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. The full guideline document consists of ten chapters and an extensive evidence base. The content of the chapter dealing with pathology in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis is presented here in order to promote international discussion and collaboration leading to improvements in colorectal cancer screening and diagnosis by making the principles and standards recommended in the new EU Guidelines known to a wider scientific community

Reproducibility in the diagnosis of needle core biopsies of non-palpable breast lesions: an international study using virtual slides published on the world-wide web

Aims: To conduct an internet-based study using virtual slides (VS) of sterotactic core biopsy specimens of non-palpable breast lesions in order to evaluate interobserver reproducibility between pathologists. Methods and results: A total of 18 breast lesions, determined to be histologically complex by two pathologists, were selected. Digitized VSs were then created using QuickTime Virtual Reality technology (Apple, Cupertino, CA, USA) and posted on the world-wide web. In all, 10 pathologists completed the evaluations of 18 VSs using the five diagnostic categories (B1–B5) from the European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Their results were compared with those of every other participating pathologist, and were then individually compared with the results of a highly experienced breast pathologist (referee). Of the 18 cases, 10 (56%) were classified by the referee as borderline (B3 and B4). Comparisons with reference values showed a less than satisfactory level of reproducibility (median Kw = 0.60). As regards interobserver reproducibility, results showed that, in general, the level of agreement was not satisfactory (median Kw = 0.53). Conclusions: Overall, the findings are comparable to those quality control studies using circulating slides when analysis is done on borderline cases

Mammographic density and inter-observer variability of pathologic evaluation of core biopsies among women with mammographic abnormalities

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>As high percentage of mammographic densities complicates the assessment of imaging findings, mammographic density may influence the histopathological evaluation of core-biopsies of the breast. We measured the influence of mammographic density on the inter-observer variability of histopathological findings of breast biopsies.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Histological slides of 695 women who underwent core biopsies of the breast at University of Halle between 2006 and 2008 were evaluated in a blinded fashion by two pathologists using the five levels of the B-categorization scheme (B1-B5). To quantify mammographic density, we used a computer-based threshold method (Madena). We calculated observed and chance-corrected agreements (weighted kappa) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) according to four categories of mammographic density (<10%, 10<25%, 25<50%, ≥50%).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The weighted kappa decreased monotonically from 89.6% (95% CI: 85.8%, 93.3%) among women with less than 10% of mammographic density to 80.4% (95% CI: 69.9%, 90.9%) for women with more than 50% of mammographic density, respectively. Results of a kappa regression analysis showed that agreement of pathologists on clinically relevant categories (B1-B2 versus B3-B5) decreased with mammographic density.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Mammographic density is a relevant modifier of the agreement between pathologists who assess breast biopsies using the B-categorization scheme. The influence of mammographic density on the inter-observer variability can be explained to some extent by varying prevalences of histological entities across B categories that have typically different inter-observer agreement. Women with high mammographic density are at higher risk of inter-observer variability compared to women with low mammographic density and should possibly undergo a second pathology review.</p