Consensus based recommendations for the diagnosis of serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma: an international Delphi study.

Autor: Bogaerts JMA; Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands., van Bommel MHD; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands., Hermens RPMG; IQ Healthcare, Radboud Institute of Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands., Steenbeek MP; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands., de Hullu JA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands., van der Laak JAWM; Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.; Center for Medical Image Science and Visualization, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden., Simons M; Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Histopathology [Histopathology] 2023 Jul; Vol. 83 (1), pp. 67-79. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 Mar 20.
DOI: 10.1111/his.14902
Abstrakt: Aim: Reliably diagnosing or safely excluding serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC), a precursor lesion of tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC), is crucial for individual patient care, for better understanding the oncogenesis of HGSC, and for safely investigating novel strategies to prevent tubo-ovarian carcinoma. To optimize STIC diagnosis and increase its reproducibility, we set up a three-round Delphi study.
Methods and Results: In round 1, an international expert panel of 34 gynecologic pathologists, from 11 countries, was assembled to provide input regarding STIC diagnosis, which was used to develop a set of statements. In round 2, the panel rated their level of agreement with those statements on a 9-point Likert scale. In round 3, statements without previous consensus were rated again by the panel while anonymously disclosing the responses of the other panel members. Finally, each expert was asked to approve or disapprove the complete set of consensus statements. The panel indicated their level of agreement with 64 statements. A total of 27 statements (42%) reached consensus after three rounds. These statements reflect the entire diagnostic work-up for pathologists, regarding processing and macroscopy (three statements); microscopy (eight statements); immunohistochemistry (nine statements); interpretation and reporting (four statements); and miscellaneous (three statements). The final set of consensus statements was approved by 85%.
Conclusion: This study provides an overview of current clinical practice regarding STIC diagnosis amongst expert gynecopathologists. The experts' consensus statements form the basis for a set of recommendations, which may help towards more consistent STIC diagnosis.
(© 2023 The Authors. Histopathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje