Evaluation of 12 strategies for obtaining second opinions to improve interpretation of breast histopathology: simulation study

Second opinion (external specialist referral) practice of breast pathology: the Nottingham experience

AIMS

Breast pathology is a challenging field, and discrepancies in diagnoses exist and can affect patient management. This study aims to review a breast referral practice and assess the pattern and frequency of breast lesions sent for an external expert review and evaluate potential impacts on patients' care.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Seven hundred and forty cases that were referred to Nottingham City Hospital for a second opinion between 2019 and 2022 which have slides and reports were retrieved and reviewed. Reasons for referral, initial diagnosis, proffered specialist opinion and any discrepancy or potential impacts of management were assessed. The most frequent entities were papillary lesions (19%), fibroepithelial lesions (17%), invasive carcinomas that were sent for confirmation of the invasive diagnosis or subtyping of the invasive tumour (17%), intraductal epithelial proliferation with atypia (9%) and spindle cell lesions (8%). Other entities included biphasic tumours such as adenomyoepithelioma, as well as vascular and nipple lesions. Few cases were sent for prognostic classification or comments on the management, and in occasional cases no initial diagnosis was offered. After reviewing the cases by the expert pathologists, the initial diagnosis was confirmed or one of the suggested diagnoses was preferred in 79% of cases, including 129 cases (17%) in which the opinion resulted minor changes in the management. Significant changes in the classification of lesions were made in 132 cases (18%) which resulted in significant change in the patient management recommendation. In 14 cases (2%) a final classification was not possible, and further specialist opinion was obtained. Comments on the differential diagnosis and advice on further patient management were provided in most cases.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the value of external referral of challenging, rare and difficult to classify breast lesions. It also highlights the most common breast lesions that are likely to be challenging, and specialist opinion can refine their classification to improve patient care.

Histopathological diagnosis of cutaneous melanocytic lesions: blinded and nonblinded second opinions offer similar improvement in diagnostic accuracy

BACKGROUND

Previous studies of second opinions in the diagnosis of melanocytic skin lesions have examined blinded second opinions, which do not reflect usual clinical practice. The current study, conducted in the USA, investigated both blinded and nonblinded second opinions for their impact on diagnostic accuracy.

METHODS

In total, 100 melanocytic skin biopsy cases, ranging from benign to invasive melanoma, were interpreted by 74 dermatopathologists. Subsequently, 151 dermatopathologists performed nonblinded second and third reviews. We compared the accuracy of single reviewers, second opinions obtained from independent, blinded reviewers and second opinions obtained from sequential, nonblinded reviewers. Accuracy was defined with respect to a consensus reference diagnosis.

RESULTS

The mean case-level diagnostic accuracy of single reviewers was 65.3% (95% CI 63.4-67.2%). Second opinions arising from sequential, nonblinded reviewers significantly improved accuracy to 69.9% (95% CI 68.0-71.7%; P < 0.001). Similarly, second opinions arising from blinded reviewers improved upon the accuracy of single reviewers (69.2%; 95% CI 68.0-71.7%). Nonblinded reviewers were more likely than blinded reviewers to give diagnoses in the same diagnostic classes as the first diagnosis. Nonblinded reviewers tended to be more confident when they agreed with previous reviewers, even with inaccurate diagnoses.

CONCLUSION

We found that both blinded and nonblinded second reviewers offered a similar modest improvement in diagnostic accuracy compared with single reviewers. Obtaining second opinions with knowledge of previous reviews tends to generate agreement among reviews, and may generate unwarranted confidence in an inaccurate diagnosis. Combining aspects of both blinded and nonblinded review in practice may leverage the advantages while mitigating the disadvantages of each approach. Specifically, a second pathologist could give an initial diagnosis blinded to the results of the first pathologist, with subsequent nonblinded discussion between the two pathologists if their diagnoses differ.

Analysis of the three-year work of a digital pathomorphological laboratory built from the ground

Digital pathology is a new stage in the development of pathomorphological diagnostics. This topic was most widespread during the COVID-19 pandemic. The advantages of digitization of diagnostics include the possibility of remote work of a pathologist, remote asynchronous consultation, and automation of business processes. They provide an increase in diagnostic quality and speed up the diagnosis process. These benefits are only a small part of what digital cancer diagnostics can provide. This article is written on our own experience of Russia's first fully digital pathomorphological laboratory UNIM. All advantages and disadvantages of digitization, peculiarities of using technology, differences from the conventional approach to diagnostics, the economics of the process, the importance of integration with LIS (laboratory information system) and MIS (medical information system), errors and principles of their solution, payback will be discussed, and every stage of laboratory work will be considered in detail: from logistics and registration to diagnosis and archiving. Due to the fact that all data has been digitized over several years, we will present a comprehensive analysis of statistics and observations on how to organize processes in a fully digital laboratory. A key feature of our experience is the high cost-effectiveness of the platform and approach, which allowed us to win the competition in the market. The result of the survey of doctors' attitudes towards digital pathology will also be presented.

Error Reduction and Diagnostic Concordance in Breast Pathology

Errors in anatomic pathology can result in patients receiving inappropriate treatment and poor patient outcomes. Policies and procedures are necessary to decrease error and improve diagnostic concordance. Breast pathology may be more prone to diagnostic errors than other surgical pathology subspecialties due to inherit borderline diagnostic categories such as atypical ductal hyperplasia and low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ. Mandatory secondary review of internal and outside referral cases before treatment is effective in reducing diagnostic errors and improving concordance. Assessment of error through amendment/addendum tracking, implementing an incident reporting system, and multidisciplinary tumor boards can establish procedures to prevent future error.

Diagnostic concordance among pathologists interpreting breast core biopsies on secondary review over a 1-year period at an Australian tertiary hospital

This study provides data on the diagnostic concordance between initial and review diagnoses of all breast core biopsy cases at a single tertiary hospital in Western Australia over a 1-year period. A retrospective review of all breast core biopsy cases between January 1 and December 31, 2016, was carried out at PathWest, Fiona Stanley Hospital in Perth, Western Australia. Each biopsy is reported by a single pathologist and then reviewed within 1 week by a panel of intradepartmental subspecialist breast pathologists, who either agree with the original diagnosis, have a minor discordant diagnosis, or a major discordant diagnosis. Records for 2036 core biopsies were available between January 1 and December 31, 2016. Of these, 56.0% (n = 1141) were classified as benign, 34.3% (n = 699) as malignant, 7.2% (n = 147) as indeterminate, 2.3% (n = 46) as nondiagnostic, and 0.1% (n = 3) as suspicious for malignancy. In 99.1% (n = 2018) of cases, there was agreement between initial and review diagnoses. In total, 0.9% (n = 18) were disagreements: 0.49% (n = 10) were major discordant disagreements and 0.39% (n = 8) were minor discordant disagreements. All cases of major discordant disagreements would have resulted in significant changes to clinical management. This study demonstrates that an Australian institution is providing a high-quality pathology service with a low error rate between initial and review diagnoses of breast core biopsies. It reinforces the importance of secondary review of biopsies in a timely fashion for detecting potentially serious misdiagnoses that could lead to inappropriate management.

Variability in grading of ductal carcinoma in situ among an international group of pathologists

The prognostic value of cytonuclear grade in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is debated, partly due to high interobserver variability and the use of multiple guidelines. The aim of this study was to evaluate interobserver agreement in grading DCIS between Dutch, British, and American pathologists. Haematoxylin and eosin-stained slides of 425 women with primary DCIS were independently reviewed by nine breast pathologists based in the Netherlands, the UK, and the USA. Chance-corrected kappa (κma ) for association between pathologists was calculated based on a generalised linear mixed model using the ordinal package in R. Overall κma for grade of DCIS (low, intermediate, or high) was estimated to be 0.50 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44-0.56), indicating a moderate association between pathologists. When the model was adjusted for national guidelines, the association for grade did not change (κma = 0.53; 95% CI 0.48-0.57); subgroup analysis for pathologists using the UK pathology guidelines only had significantly higher association (κma = 0.58; 95% CI 0.56-0.61). To assess if concordance of grading relates to the expression of the oestrogen receptor (ER) and HER2, archived immunohistochemistry was analysed on a subgroup (n = 106). This showed that non-high grade according to the majority opinion was associated with ER positivity and HER2 negativity (100 and 89% of non-high grade cases, respectively). In conclusion, DCIS grade showed only moderate association using whole slide images scored by nine breast pathologists. As therapeutic decisions and inclusion in ongoing clinical trials are guided by DCIS grade, there is a pressing need to reduce interobserver variability in grading. ER and HER2 might be supportive to prevent the accidental and unwanted inclusion of high-grade DCIS in such trials.

Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: ASCO/CAP Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Inter-observer reproducibility of classical lobular neoplasia (B3 lesions) in preoperative breast biopsies: a study of the Swiss Working Group of breast and gynecopathologists

PURPOSE

Classical type of lobular neoplasia (LN) spans a spectrum of disease, including atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH) and lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS), classical lobular neoplasia (LN), and the three-tiered classification of lobular intraepithelial neoplasia (LIN-1, -2, -3). This study addressed inter-observer variability of classical lobular neoplasias (LN) (B3 lesions) in preoperative breast biopsies among breast and gynecopathologists METHODS: A retrospective, observational, cross-sectional study was conducted. 40 preoperative digital images of breast core/vacuum biopsies were analyzed by eight experienced breast- and gynecopathologists. Evaluation criteria were ALH, LCIS, LN classic, LIN-1, LIN-2, LIN-3, focal B3 (one focus), extensive B3 (> one focus). Kappa-index and Chi-square tests were used for statistics. Digital scanned slides were provided to each participant. Agreement between the categories was defined as at least six of eight (cut-off 75%) concordant diagnoses.

RESULTS

The highest agreement between eight pathologists was reached using the category lobular neoplasia (LN, classical), 26/40 (65%) cases were diagnosed as such. Agreements in other categories was low or poor: 12/40 (30%) (ALH), 9/40 (22%) (LCIS), 8/40 (20%) (LIN-1), 8/40 (20%) (focal B3), 3/40 (7.5%) (LIN-2), and 2/40 (5%) (extensive B3). Chi-square-test (classical LN versus the other nomenclatures) was significant (p = 0.001137).

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that among Swiss breast pathologists, the most reproducible diagnosis for B3 lobular lesions is the category of classical LN. These data further support lack of consistent data in retrospective studies using different terminologies. Validation of reproducible nomenclature is warranted in further studies. This information is useful especially in view of retro- and prospective data analysis with different diagnostic categories.

External quality assessment (EQA) program for the immunohistochemical detection of ER, PR and Ki-67 in breast cancer: results of an interlaboratory reproducibility ring study in China

Background

An External Quality Assessment (EQA) program was developed to investigate the status of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and Ki-67 immunohistochemical (IHC) detection in breast cancer and to evaluate the reproducibility of staining and interpretation in 44 pathology laboratories in China.

Methods

This program was implemented through three specific steps. In study I, three revising centres defined the reference value for 11 sections. In study II, 41 participating centres (PC) stained and interpreted 11 sections by their own daily practice IHC protocols. In study III, all cases received second interpretation opinions.

Results

The stained slides of 44 laboratories were up to the interpretation standard. The overall interpretation concordance rate of this study was over 90%. A perfect agreement was reached among the PCs for the cases with ER+ and PR+ > 50% and Ki-67 > 30%, whereas a moderate agreement was observed for intermediate categories. After second interpretations, the misclassification rates for ER were reduced by 12.20%, for PR were reduced by 17.07%, and for Ki-67 were reduced by 4.88%. Up to 31 PCs observed a benefit from the second opinion strategy.

Conclusions

This project is the first EQA study performed on a national scale for assessment of ER, PR and Ki-67 status by IHC in China. In the whole IHC evaluation process, the intermediate categories were less reproducible than those with high expression rates. Second opinions can significantly improve the diagnostic agreement of pathologists’ interpretations.

Assessment of Second-Opinion Strategies for Diagnoses of Cutaneous Melanocytic Lesions

Importance

Histopathologic criteria have limited diagnostic reliability for a range of cutaneous melanocytic lesions.

Objective

To evaluate the association of second-opinion strategies by general pathologists and dermatopathologists with the overall reliability of diagnosis of difficult melanocytic lesions.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This diagnostic study used samples from the Melanoma Pathology Study, which comprises 240 melanocytic lesion samples selected from a dermatopathology laboratory in Bellevue, Washington, and represents the full spectrum of lesions from common nevi to invasive melanoma. Five sets of 48 samples were evaluated independently by 187 US pathologists from July 15, 2013, through May 23, 2016. Data analysis was performed from April 2016 through November 2017.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Accuracy of diagnosis, defined as concordance with an expert consensus diagnosis of 3 experienced pathologists, was assessed after applying 10 different second-opinion strategies.

Results

Among the 187 US pathologists examining the 24 lesion samples, 113 were general pathologists (65 men [57.5%]; mean age at survey, 53.7 years [range, 33.0-79.0 years]) and 74 were dermatopathologists (49 men [66.2%]; mean age at survey, 46.4 years [range, 33.0-77.0 years]). Among the 8976 initial case interpretations, physicians desired second opinions for 3899 (43.4%), most often for interpretation of severely dysplastic nevi. The overall misclassification rate was highest when interpretations did not include second opinions and initial reviewers were all general pathologists lacking subspecialty training (52.8%; 95% CI, 51.3%-54.3%). When considering different second opinion strategies, the misclassification of melanocytic lesions was lowest when the first, second, and third consulting reviewers were subspecialty-trained dermatopathologists and when all lesions were subject to second opinions (36.7%; 95% CI, 33.1%-40.7%). When the second opinion strategies were compared with single interpretations without second opinions, the reductions in misclassification rates for some of the strategies were statistically significant, but none of the strategies eliminated diagnostic misclassification. Melanocytic lesions in the middle of the diagnostic spectrum had the highest misclassification rates (eg, moderately or severely dysplastic nevus, Spitz nevus, melanoma in situ, and pathologic stage [p]T1a invasive melanoma). Variability of in situ and thin invasive melanoma was relatively intractable to all examined strategies.

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of this study suggest that second opinions rendered by dermatopathologists improve reliability of melanocytic lesion diagnosis. However, discordance among pathologists remained high.

Breast Cancer Prognostic Factors in the Digital Era: Comparison of Nottingham Grade using Whole Slide Images and Glass Slides

Background:

To assess reproducibility and accuracy of overall Nottingham grade and component scores using digital whole slide images (WSIs) compared to glass slides.

Methods:

Two hundred and eight pathologists were randomized to independently interpret 1 of 4 breast biopsy sets using either glass slides or digital WSI. Each set included 5 or 6 invasive carcinomas (22 total invasive cases). Participants interpreted the same biopsy set approximately 9 months later following a second randomization to WSI or glass slides. Nottingham grade, including component scores, was assessed on each interpretation, providing 2045 independent interpretations of grade. Overall grade and component scores were compared between pathologists (interobserver agreement) and for interpretations by the same pathologist (intraobserver agreement). Grade assessments were compared when the format (WSI vs. glass slides) changed or was the same for the two interpretations.

Results:

Nottingham grade intraobserver agreement was highest using glass slides for both interpretations (73%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 68%, 78%) and slightly lower but not statistically different using digital WSI for both interpretations (68%, 95% CI: 61%, 75%; P= 0.22). The agreement was lowest when the format changed between interpretations (63%, 95% CI: 59%, 68%). Interobserver agreement was significantly higher (P < 0.001) using glass slides versus digital WSI (68%, 95% CI: 66%, 70% versus 60%, 95% CI: 57%, 62%, respectively). Nuclear pleomorphism scores had the lowest inter- and intra-observer agreement. Mitotic scores were higher on glass slides in inter- and intra-observer comparisons.

Conclusions:

Pathologists’ intraobserver agreement (reproducibility) is similar for Nottingham grade using glass slides or WSI. However, slightly lower agreement between pathologists suggests that verification of grade using digital WSI may be more challenging.

Blinding or information control in diagnosis: could it reduce errors in clinical decision-making?

Background Clinical medicine has long recognized the potential for cognitive bias in the development of new treatments, and in response developed a tradition of blinding both clinicians and patients to address this specific concern. Although cognitive biases have been shown to exist which impact the accuracy of clinical diagnosis, blinding the diagnostician to potentially misleading information has received little attention as a possible solution. Recently, within the forensic sciences, the control of contextual information (i.e. information apart from the objective test results) has been studied as a technique to reduce errors. We consider the applicability of this technique to clinical medicine. Content This article briefly describes the empirical research examining cognitive biases arising from context which impact clinical diagnosis. We then review the recent awakening of forensic sciences to the serious effects of misleading information. Comparing the approaches, we discuss whether blinding to contextual information might (and in what circumstances) reduce clinical errors. Summary and outlook Substantial research indicates contextual information plays a significant role in diagnostic error and conclusions across several medical specialties. The forensic sciences may provide a useful model for the control of potentially misleading information in diagnosis. A conceptual analog of the forensic blinding process (the "agnostic" first reading) may be applicable to diagnostic investigations such as imaging, microscopic tissue examinations and waveform recognition. An "agnostic" approach, where the first reading occurs with minimal clinical referral information, but is followed by incorporation of the clinical history and reinterpretation, has the potential to reduce errors.

Complexities of perceived and actual performance in pathology interpretation: A comparison of cutaneous melanocytic skin and breast interpretations

BACKGROUND

Little is known about how pathologists process differences between actual and perceived interpretations.

OBJECTIVE

To compare perceived and actual diagnostic agreement before and after educational interventions.

METHODS

Pathologists interpreted test sets of skin and/or breast specimens that included benign, atypical, in situ and invasive lesions. Interventions involved self-directed learning, one skin and one breast, that showed pathologists how their interpretations compared to a reference diagnoses. Prior to the educational intervention, participants estimated how their interpretations would compare to the reference diagnoses. After the intervention, participants estimated their overall agreement with the reference diagnoses. Perceived and actual agreements were compared.

RESULTS

For pathologists interpreting skin, mean actual agreement was 52.4% and overall pre- and postinterventional mean perceived agreement was 72.9% vs 54.2%, an overestimated mean difference of 20.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 17.2% to 24.0%) and 1.8% (95% CI -0.5% to 4.1%), respectively. For pathologists interpreting breast, mean actual agreement was 75.9% and overall pre- and postinterventional mean perceived agreement was 81.4% vs 76.9%, an overestimation of 5.5% (95% CI 3.0% to 8.0%) and 1.0% (95% CI 0.0% to 2.0%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Pathologists interpreting breast tissue had improved comprehension of their performance after the intervention compared to pathologists interpreting skin lesions.

Effects of DNA Methylation on Progression to Interstitial Fibrosis and Tubular Atrophy in Renal Allograft Biopsies: A Multi-Omics Approach

Progressive fibrosis of the interstitium is the dominant final pathway in renal destruction in native and transplanted kidneys. Over time, the continuum of molecular events following immunological and nonimmunological insults lead to interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy and culminate in kidney failure. We hypothesize that these insults trigger changes in DNA methylation (DNAm) patterns, which in turn could exacerbate injury and slow down the regeneration processes, leading to fibrosis development and graft dysfunction. Herein, we analyzed biopsy samples from kidney allografts collected 24 months posttransplantation and used an integrative multi-omics approach to understand the underlying molecular mechanisms. The role of DNAm and microRNAs on the graft gene expression was evaluated. Enrichment analyses of differentially methylated CpG sites were performed using GenomeRunner. CpGs were strongly enriched in regions that were variably methylated among tissues, implying high tissue specificity in their regulatory impact. Corresponding to this methylation pattern, gene expression data were related to immune response (activated state) and nephrogenesis (inhibited state). Preimplantation biopsies showed similar DNAm patterns to normal allograft biopsies at 2 years posttransplantation. Our findings demonstrate for the first time a relationship among epigenetic modifications and development of interstitial fibrosis, graft function, and inter-individual variation on long-term outcomes.

Characteristics associated with requests by pathologists for second opinions on breast biopsies

AIMS

Second opinions in pathology improve patient safety by reducing diagnostic errors, leading to more appropriate clinical treatment decisions. Little objective data are available regarding the factors triggering a request for second opinion despite second opinion consultations being part of the diagnostic system of pathology. Therefore we sought to assess breast biopsy cases and interpreting pathologists characteristics associated with second opinion requests.

METHODS

Collected pathologist surveys and their interpretations of 60 test set cases were used to explore the relationships between case characteristics, pathologist characteristics and case perceptions, and requests for second opinions. Data were evaluated by logistic regression and generalised estimating equations.

RESULTS

115 pathologists provided 6900 assessments; pathologists requested second opinions on 70% (4827/6900) of their assessments 36% (1731/4827) of these would not have been required by policy. All associations between case characteristics and requesting second opinions were statistically significant, including diagnostic category, breast density, biopsy type, and number of diagnoses noted per case. Exclusive of institutional policies, pathologists wanted second opinions most frequently for atypia (66%) and least frequently for invasive cancer (20%). Second opinion rates were higher when the pathologist had lower assessment confidence, in cases with higher perceived difficulty, and cases with borderline diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

Pathologists request second opinions for challenging cases, particularly those with atypia, high breast density, core needle biopsies, or many co-existing diagnoses. Further studies should evaluate whether the case characteristics identified in this study could be used as clinical criteria to prompt system-level strategies for mandating second opinions.

Second opinion strategies in breast pathology: a decision analysis addressing over-treatment, under-treatment, and care costs

PURPOSE

To estimate the potential near-term population impact of alternative second opinion breast biopsy pathology interpretation strategies.

METHODS

Decision analysis examining 12-month outcomes of breast biopsy for nine breast pathology interpretation strategies in the U.S. health system. Diagnoses of 115 practicing pathologists in the Breast Pathology Study were compared to reference-standard-consensus diagnoses with and without second opinions. Interpretation strategies were defined by whether a second opinion was sought universally or selectively (e.g., 2nd opinion if invasive). Main outcomes were the expected proportion of concordant breast biopsy diagnoses, the proportion involving over- or under-interpretation, and cost of care in U.S. dollars within one-year of biopsy.

RESULTS

Without a second opinion, 92.2% of biopsies received a concordant diagnosis. Concordance rates increased under all second opinion strategies, and the rate was highest (95.1%) and under-treatment lowest (2.6%) when all biopsies had second opinions. However, over-treatment was lowest when second opinions were sought selectively for initial diagnoses of invasive cancer, DCIS, or atypia (1.8 vs. 4.7% with no 2nd opinions). This strategy also had the lowest projected 12-month care costs ($5.907 billion vs. $6.049 billion with no 2nd opinions).

CONCLUSIONS

Second opinion strategies could lower overall care costs while reducing both over- and under-treatment. The most accurate cost-saving strategy required second opinions for initial diagnoses of invasive cancer, DCIS, or atypia.

Diagnostic Reproducibility: What Happens When the Same Pathologist Interprets the Same Breast Biopsy Specimen at Two Points in Time?

BACKGROUND

Surgeons may receive a different diagnosis when a breast biopsy is interpreted by a second pathologist. The extent to which diagnostic agreement by the same pathologist varies at two time points is unknown.

METHODS

Pathologists from eight U.S. states independently interpreted 60 breast specimens, one glass slide per case, on two occasions separated by ≥9 months. Reproducibility was assessed by comparing interpretations between the two time points; associations between reproducibility (intraobserver agreement rates); and characteristics of pathologists and cases were determined and also compared with interobserver agreement of baseline interpretations.

RESULTS

Sixty-five percent of invited, responding pathologists were eligible and consented; 49 interpreted glass slides in both study phases, resulting in 2940 interpretations. Intraobserver agreement rates between the two phases were 92% [95% confidence interval (CI) 88-95] for invasive breast cancer, 84% (95% CI 81-87) for ductal carcinoma-in-situ, 53% (95% CI 47-59) for atypia, and 84% (95% CI 81-86) for benign without atypia. When comparing all study participants' case interpretations at baseline, interobserver agreement rates were 89% (95% CI 84-92) for invasive cancer, 79% (95% CI 76-81) for ductal carcinoma-in-situ, 43% (95% CI 41-45) for atypia, and 77% (95% CI 74-79) for benign without atypia.

CONCLUSIONS

Interpretive agreement between two time points by the same individual pathologist was low for atypia and was similar to observed rates of agreement for atypia between different pathologists. Physicians and patients should be aware of the diagnostic challenges associated with a breast biopsy diagnosis of atypia when considering treatment and surveillance decisions.