Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Emerging
data suggest that ovarian cancers differ by tumor grade. However, the
reliability of microscopic grade from paraffin tissue in the general
medical community and as reflected in population-based cancer registries
is unknown.
METHODS:
We examined grade agreement between
two gynecologic pathologists and the Surveillance Epidemiology and End
Results Residual Tissue Repository (SEER). Grade agreement was assessed
with percent observer agreement and kappa coefficients for 664 invasive
ovarian carcinomas, using previously defined three-tier and two-tier
grading systems. A random subset of ovarian carcinomas was selected to
compare intra- and inter-pathologist agreement.
RESULTS:
Five
hundred and eighty-six of SEER's 664 tumors were confirmed invasive.
Percent agreement was 49 % with fair kappa coefficient = 0.25 (95 % CI:
0.20-0.30) for the 664 tumors. Agreement improved slightly when
restricted to the 586 confirmed invasive cancers; it was better for high
grade than low grade tumors, for two-tier than three-tier grading
systems, and within (66 %) than between study pathologists (43 %). Grade
was not a robust independent predictor of ovarian cancer-specific
survival.
CONCLUSIONS:
Grade agreement was fair between
SEER and study pathologists irrespective of grading system. Recorded
grade in SEER should be used with caution and is probably not a reliable
metric for ovarian cancer epidemiology.
0 comments :
Post a Comment
Your comments?
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.