The significance of central pathology review in clinical studies of transitional cell carcinoma in situ

Francis E Sharkey, Michael F. Sarosdy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The causes of interobserver variation in the pathological diagnosis of urothelial neoplasia were studied. Materials and Methods: A central review was performed on pathological specimens in a multi- institutional clinical study of patients with in situ transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Results: A significant discrepancy in pathological diagnosis was noted between the original report and the central review in 60 of 159 biopsies (38%) and in 73 of 217 cytology specimens (34%). Biopsy discrepancies were almost equally divided between upgrades and downgrades, whereas 89% of cytology discrepancies involved an upgrade in diagnosis by the central reviewer. The most significant factor causing variability in biopsy diagnoses was the multiplicity of classifications used by the originating pathologists. Other factors included fixation and biopsy artifacts. Cell degeneration secondary to treatment was the most important factor resulting in cytology under grading. At originating institutions the correlation of diagnoses between concurrent biopsy and cytology specimens was poor. Conclusions: The lack of a well accepted standard for the histopathological diagnosis of transitional cell carcinoma in situ poses a major problem for multi-institutional studies of this disease. Organizers must include a histopathological standard in the study plan and publicize it to all participants, particularly pathologists. Central review of pathological specimens is essential to maintain data integrity.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)68-71
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume157
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 1997

Fingerprint

Transitional Cell Carcinoma
Carcinoma in Situ
Pathology
Cell Biology
Biopsy
Observer Variation
Artifacts
Clinical Studies
Urinary Bladder
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • bladder neoplasms
  • carcinoma in situ
  • carcinoma, transitional cell
  • pathology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

The significance of central pathology review in clinical studies of transitional cell carcinoma in situ. / Sharkey, Francis E; Sarosdy, Michael F.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 157, No. 1, 01.1997, p. 68-71.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sharkey, Francis E ; Sarosdy, Michael F. / The significance of central pathology review in clinical studies of transitional cell carcinoma in situ. In: Journal of Urology. 1997 ; Vol. 157, No. 1. pp. 68-71.
@article{8be513c6bcc8464abb71b348cfc4e77a,
title = "The significance of central pathology review in clinical studies of transitional cell carcinoma in situ",
abstract = "Purpose: The causes of interobserver variation in the pathological diagnosis of urothelial neoplasia were studied. Materials and Methods: A central review was performed on pathological specimens in a multi- institutional clinical study of patients with in situ transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Results: A significant discrepancy in pathological diagnosis was noted between the original report and the central review in 60 of 159 biopsies (38{\%}) and in 73 of 217 cytology specimens (34{\%}). Biopsy discrepancies were almost equally divided between upgrades and downgrades, whereas 89{\%} of cytology discrepancies involved an upgrade in diagnosis by the central reviewer. The most significant factor causing variability in biopsy diagnoses was the multiplicity of classifications used by the originating pathologists. Other factors included fixation and biopsy artifacts. Cell degeneration secondary to treatment was the most important factor resulting in cytology under grading. At originating institutions the correlation of diagnoses between concurrent biopsy and cytology specimens was poor. Conclusions: The lack of a well accepted standard for the histopathological diagnosis of transitional cell carcinoma in situ poses a major problem for multi-institutional studies of this disease. Organizers must include a histopathological standard in the study plan and publicize it to all participants, particularly pathologists. Central review of pathological specimens is essential to maintain data integrity.",
keywords = "bladder neoplasms, carcinoma in situ, carcinoma, transitional cell, pathology",
author = "Sharkey, {Francis E} and Sarosdy, {Michael F.}",
year = "1997",
month = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "157",
pages = "68--71",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The significance of central pathology review in clinical studies of transitional cell carcinoma in situ

AU - Sharkey, Francis E

AU - Sarosdy, Michael F.

PY - 1997/1

Y1 - 1997/1

N2 - Purpose: The causes of interobserver variation in the pathological diagnosis of urothelial neoplasia were studied. Materials and Methods: A central review was performed on pathological specimens in a multi- institutional clinical study of patients with in situ transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Results: A significant discrepancy in pathological diagnosis was noted between the original report and the central review in 60 of 159 biopsies (38%) and in 73 of 217 cytology specimens (34%). Biopsy discrepancies were almost equally divided between upgrades and downgrades, whereas 89% of cytology discrepancies involved an upgrade in diagnosis by the central reviewer. The most significant factor causing variability in biopsy diagnoses was the multiplicity of classifications used by the originating pathologists. Other factors included fixation and biopsy artifacts. Cell degeneration secondary to treatment was the most important factor resulting in cytology under grading. At originating institutions the correlation of diagnoses between concurrent biopsy and cytology specimens was poor. Conclusions: The lack of a well accepted standard for the histopathological diagnosis of transitional cell carcinoma in situ poses a major problem for multi-institutional studies of this disease. Organizers must include a histopathological standard in the study plan and publicize it to all participants, particularly pathologists. Central review of pathological specimens is essential to maintain data integrity.

AB - Purpose: The causes of interobserver variation in the pathological diagnosis of urothelial neoplasia were studied. Materials and Methods: A central review was performed on pathological specimens in a multi- institutional clinical study of patients with in situ transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Results: A significant discrepancy in pathological diagnosis was noted between the original report and the central review in 60 of 159 biopsies (38%) and in 73 of 217 cytology specimens (34%). Biopsy discrepancies were almost equally divided between upgrades and downgrades, whereas 89% of cytology discrepancies involved an upgrade in diagnosis by the central reviewer. The most significant factor causing variability in biopsy diagnoses was the multiplicity of classifications used by the originating pathologists. Other factors included fixation and biopsy artifacts. Cell degeneration secondary to treatment was the most important factor resulting in cytology under grading. At originating institutions the correlation of diagnoses between concurrent biopsy and cytology specimens was poor. Conclusions: The lack of a well accepted standard for the histopathological diagnosis of transitional cell carcinoma in situ poses a major problem for multi-institutional studies of this disease. Organizers must include a histopathological standard in the study plan and publicize it to all participants, particularly pathologists. Central review of pathological specimens is essential to maintain data integrity.

KW - bladder neoplasms

KW - carcinoma in situ

KW - carcinoma, transitional cell

KW - pathology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031060567&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031060567&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8976218

AN - SCOPUS:0031060567

VL - 157

SP - 68

EP - 71

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 1

ER -