Tumor budding in colorectal carcinoma: An institutional interobserver reliability and prognostic study of colorectal adenocarcinoma cases.


Journal

Annals of diagnostic pathology
ISSN: 1532-8198
Titre abrégé: Ann Diagn Pathol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9800503

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Dec 2019
Historique:
received: 05 06 2019
revised: 03 09 2019
accepted: 17 09 2019
pubmed: 16 11 2019
medline: 12 5 2020
entrez: 16 11 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Colorectal carcinomas are one of the most commonly diagnosed malignancies. There are many prognostic factors relating to clinical course and disease progression, including tumor stage, metastasis, and tumor budding. In 2016, the International Tumor Budding Consensus Conference (ITBCC) created a system to uniformly assess tumor budding. This system includes a 3-tier system for the grading of tumor budding. In the past, there lacked uniform consensus, however the general grading practice was based on a 2-tiered system. Given that tumor budding is considered to have prognostic value, the accuracy and reproducibility of its assessment is vital. Our study aims to look at interobserver agreement in the scoring of tumor budding. A total of 233 cases of colorectal carcinoma diagnosed in our health system were retrospectively analyzed and routine H&E stained slides of these cases were collected. A representative slide for tumor budding was selected per case. Four investigators with different levels of experience and expertise evaluated the selected slide of each case for tumor budding. Scoring was based on the ITBCC protocol. Clinico-pathological data was collected for each case and analyzed with tumor budding scores. Tumor budding scores per individual investigator and consensus tumor budding score were compared to patient and tumor characteristics including patient survival, tumor grade, tumor stage, and lymph node status. Inter-observer agreement was calculated using Gwet's Agreement Coefficient (AC There is low inter-observer agreement in the assessment of tumor budding in colorectal carcinoma. This suggests that it is difficult to uniformly grade tumor budding and that our classification system needs improvement. We found that the older 2-tier system (Hase et al.) results in slightly higher inter-observer agreement than the recently proposed 3-tier grading system (ITBCC, 2016), though both systems lead to suboptimal agreement. Worth noting is that observers with subspecialty GI training and more work experience had higher inter-observer agreement. Our results showed that subspecialty training tends to increase agreement more than overall work experience. In addition, our exploratory results showed that there is an association of tumor budding score to tumor stage. While increasing refinement in classification, the 3-tiered system resulted in decreased agreement in tumor budding assessment. Clearly, there is more work to be done in the identification and quantification of tumor buds.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Colorectal carcinomas are one of the most commonly diagnosed malignancies. There are many prognostic factors relating to clinical course and disease progression, including tumor stage, metastasis, and tumor budding. In 2016, the International Tumor Budding Consensus Conference (ITBCC) created a system to uniformly assess tumor budding. This system includes a 3-tier system for the grading of tumor budding. In the past, there lacked uniform consensus, however the general grading practice was based on a 2-tiered system. Given that tumor budding is considered to have prognostic value, the accuracy and reproducibility of its assessment is vital. Our study aims to look at interobserver agreement in the scoring of tumor budding.
DESIGN METHODS
A total of 233 cases of colorectal carcinoma diagnosed in our health system were retrospectively analyzed and routine H&E stained slides of these cases were collected. A representative slide for tumor budding was selected per case. Four investigators with different levels of experience and expertise evaluated the selected slide of each case for tumor budding. Scoring was based on the ITBCC protocol. Clinico-pathological data was collected for each case and analyzed with tumor budding scores. Tumor budding scores per individual investigator and consensus tumor budding score were compared to patient and tumor characteristics including patient survival, tumor grade, tumor stage, and lymph node status.
RESULTS RESULTS
Inter-observer agreement was calculated using Gwet's Agreement Coefficient (AC
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
There is low inter-observer agreement in the assessment of tumor budding in colorectal carcinoma. This suggests that it is difficult to uniformly grade tumor budding and that our classification system needs improvement. We found that the older 2-tier system (Hase et al.) results in slightly higher inter-observer agreement than the recently proposed 3-tier grading system (ITBCC, 2016), though both systems lead to suboptimal agreement. Worth noting is that observers with subspecialty GI training and more work experience had higher inter-observer agreement. Our results showed that subspecialty training tends to increase agreement more than overall work experience. In addition, our exploratory results showed that there is an association of tumor budding score to tumor stage. While increasing refinement in classification, the 3-tiered system resulted in decreased agreement in tumor budding assessment. Clearly, there is more work to be done in the identification and quantification of tumor buds.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31731034
pii: S1092-9134(19)30349-1
doi: 10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2019.151420
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

151420

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Sean Hacking (S)

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra Northwell, United States of America.

Mallorie Angert (M)

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra Northwell, United States of America.

Cao Jin (C)

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra Northwell, United States of America.

Myriam Kline (M)

Biostatistics Unit, Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, Northwell Health, United States of America.

Neha Gupta (N)

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra Northwell, United States of America.

Margaret Cho (M)

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra Northwell, United States of America.

Rebecca Thomas (R)

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra Northwell, United States of America.

Lili Lee (L)

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra Northwell, United States of America.

Hector Chavarria (H)

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra Northwell, United States of America.

Mansoor Nasim (M)

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra Northwell, United States of America. Electronic address: Mnasim@northwell.edu.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH