Interobserver reproducibility of perineural invasion of prostatic adenocarcinoma in needle biopsies.
Pathology
Perineural invasion
Prostate cancer
Reproducibility
Journal
Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology
ISSN: 1432-2307
Titre abrégé: Virchows Arch
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9423843
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2021
Jun 2021
Historique:
received:
08
12
2020
accepted:
20
01
2021
revised:
15
01
2021
pubmed:
4
2
2021
medline:
29
6
2021
entrez:
3
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Numerous studies have shown a correlation between perineural invasion (PNI) in prostate biopsies and outcome. The reporting of PNI varies widely in the literature. While the interobserver variability of prostate cancer grading has been studied extensively, less is known regarding the reproducibility of PNI. A total of 212 biopsy cores from a population-based screening trial were included in this study (106 with and 106 without PNI according to the original pathology reports). The glass slides were scanned and circulated among four pathologists with a special interest in urological pathology for assessment of PNI. Discordant cases were stained by immunohistochemistry for S-100 protein. PNI was diagnosed by all four observers in 34.0% of cases, while 41.5% were considered to be negative for PNI. In 24.5% of cases, there was a disagreement between the observers. The kappa for interobserver variability was 0.67-0.75 (mean 0.73). The observations from one participant were compared with data from the original reports, and a kappa for intraobserver variability of 0.87 was achieved. Based on immunohistochemical findings among discordant cases, 88.6% had PNI while 11.4% did not. The most common diagnostic pitfall was the presence of bundles of stroma or smooth muscle. It was noted in a few cases that collagenous micronodules could be mistaken for a nerve. The distance between cancer and nerve was another cause of disagreement. Although the results suggest that the reproducibility of PNI may be greater than that of prostate cancer grading, there is still a need for improvement and standardization.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33534005
doi: 10.1007/s00428-021-03039-z
pii: 10.1007/s00428-021-03039-z
pmc: PMC8203540
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1109-1116Subventions
Organisme : Cancerfonden
ID : CAN 2017/210
Références
Histopathology. 2018 Jul;73(1):8-18
pubmed: 29359484
Hum Pathol. 2001 Jan;32(1):74-80
pubmed: 11172298
Cancer. 2009 Aug 1;115(15):3379-91
pubmed: 19484787
Histopathology. 2006 May;48(6):644-54
pubmed: 16681679
Scand J Urol. 2019 Oct;53(5):287-294
pubmed: 31401922
Mayo Clin Proc. 2014 Mar;89(3):308-18
pubmed: 24486077
Virchows Arch. 2018 Mar;472(3):451-460
pubmed: 29453523
Oncotarget. 2018 Apr 17;9(29):20555-20562
pubmed: 29755671
Am J Surg Pathol. 2008 Oct;32(10):1503-12
pubmed: 18708939
Cancer Med. 2020 May;9(10):3383-3389
pubmed: 32187859
Urology. 2013 Feb;81(2):354-7
pubmed: 23374801
J Urol. 2004 Feb;171(2 Pt 1):664-7
pubmed: 14713782
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Dec;16(16):1667-76
pubmed: 26563502
Prostate. 2015 Nov;75(15):1783-9
pubmed: 26286637
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Nov 15;81(4):e361-7
pubmed: 21820250
Histopathology. 2020 Aug;77(2):284-292
pubmed: 32285460
Urology. 2017 Apr;102:173-177
pubmed: 27864108
Pathology. 2019 Jan;51(1):11-20
pubmed: 30477882
Bioinformatics. 2016 May 1;32(9):1395-401
pubmed: 26755625
Virchows Arch. 2019 Dec;475(6):735-744
pubmed: 31588959
J Urol. 2001 Jan;165(1):126-9
pubmed: 11125380
BMC Urol. 2018 Feb 1;18(1):5
pubmed: 29390991
Hum Pathol. 2011 Jan;42(1):68-74
pubmed: 20970164
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1985 Jul-Aug;94(4 Pt 1):426-7
pubmed: 4026129
Histopathology. 2013 Jan;62(2):247-56
pubmed: 23240715