The Reproducibility of CIN Diagnoses Among Different Pathologists
| Autor: | Gian Libero Onnis, Paolo Giorgi Rossi, Vito V. Gomes, Guglielmo Ronco, Giuseppe Galanti, B. Ghiringhello, Anna Maria Buccoliero, Pamela Giubilato, Eliana Gilioli, Paolo Palma, Mirella Aldi, GianPiero Casadei, D. Aldovini, Guido Collina |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2009 |
| Předmět: |
Gynecology
Cervical cancer medicine.medical_specialty Randomization business.industry Anatomical pathology General Medicine medicine.disease Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia female genital diseases and pregnancy complications Confidence interval law.invention Randomized controlled trial law Internal medicine medicine Medical diagnosis Stage (cooking) business |
| Zdroj: | American Journal of Clinical Pathology. 132:125-132 |
| ISSN: | 1943-7722 0002-9173 |
| Popis: | The reproducibility of cervical histology diagnoses is critical for efficient screening and to evaluate the effectiveness of new technologies. The vast majority of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) diagnoses reported in the New Technologies for Cervical Cancer study were blindly reviewed by 2 independent pathologists. Only H&E-stained slides were used for the review. The reviewers were asked to reclassify cases using the following categories: normal CIN 1, CIN 2, CIN 3, and squamous and glandular invasive cancer. We reviewed 1,003 cases. The interobserver agreement was 0.36 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32–0.40) with an unweighted κ and 0.54 with a weighted κ (95% CI, 0.50–0.58). The κ values from dichotomous classifications with the threshold at CIN 2 were 0.69 (95% CI, 0.64–0.73) and 0.57 (95% CI, 0.51–0.63) with the threshold at CIN 3. The CIN 2 diagnosis had the lowest class-specific agreement, with fewer than 50% of cases confirmed by the panel members, which supports the fact that CIN 2 is not a well-defined stage in the pathogenesis of cervical neoplasia. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|