Variability in diagnostic opinion among pathologists for single small atypical foci in prostate biopsies.

Department of Pathology, 11th floor, University Health Network, 200 Elizabeth Street, Toronto M5G 2C4, Canada.
The American journal of surgical pathology (Impact Factor: 4.06). 02/2010; 34(2):169-77. DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3181c7997b
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Pathologists are increasingly exposed to prostate biopsies with small atypical foci, requiring differentiation between adenocarcinoma, atypical small acinar proliferation suspicious for malignancy, and a benign diagnosis. We studied the level of agreement for such atypical foci among experts in urologic pathology and all-round reference pathologists of the European Randomized Screening study of Prostate Cancer (ERSPC). For this purpose, we retrieved 20 prostate biopsies with small (most <1 mm) atypical foci. Hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides, including 10 immunostained slides were digitalized for virtual microscopy. The lesional area was not marked. Five experts and 7 ERSPC pathologists examined the cases. Multirater kappa statistics was applied to determine agreement and significant differences between experts and ERSPC pathologists. The kappa value of experts (0.39; confidence interval, 0.29-0.49) was significantly higher than that of ERSPC pathologists (0.21; confidence interval, 0.14-0.27). Full (100%) agreement was reached by the 5 experts for 7 of 20 biopsies. Experts and ERSPC pathologists rendered diagnoses ranging from benign to adenocarcinoma on the same biopsy in 5 and 9 biopsies, respectively. Most of these lesions comprised between 2 and 5 atypical glands. The experts diagnosed adenocarcinoma (49%) more often than the ERSPC pathologists (32%) (P<0.001). As agreement was particularly poor for foci comprising <6 glands, we would encourage pathologists to obtain intercollegial consultation of a specialized pathologist for these lesions before a carcinoma diagnosis, whereas clinicians may consider to perform staging biopsies before engaging on deferred or definite therapy.

1 Bookmark
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Fusions of androgen-regulated genes and v-ets erythroblastosis virus E26 oncogene homolog (avian) (ERG) occur in approximately 50% of prostate cancers, encoding a truncated ERG product. In prostatectomy specimens, ERG rearrangements are greater than 99% specific for prostate cancer or high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia adjacent to ERG-rearranged prostate cancer by fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry. To evaluate ERG staining by immunohistochemistry on needle biopsies, including diagnostically challenging cases. Biopsies from a retrospective cohort (n  =  111) enriched in cores requiring diagnostic immunohistochemistry and a prospective cohort from all cases during 3 months (n  =  311) were stained with an anti-ERG antibody (clone EPR3864). Among evaluable cores (n  =  418), ERG staining was confined to cancerous epithelium (71 of 160 cores; 44%), high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (12 of 68 cores; 18%), and atypical foci (3 of 28 cores; 11%), with staining in only 2 of 162 cores (1%) diagnosed as benign. The ERG was expressed in about 5 morphologically benign glands across 418 cores and was uniformly expressed by all cancerous glands in 70 of 71 cores (99%). ERG staining is more prostate cancer-specific than α-methylacyl-coenzyme A racemase, and staining in an atypical focus supports a diagnosis of cancer if high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia can be excluded. Thus, ERG staining shows utility in diagnostically challenging biopsies and may be useful in molecularly subtyping prostate cancer and in stratifying isolated high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia by risk of subsequent cancer.
    Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine 08/2012; 136(8):935-46. · 2.78 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Whole slide imaging (WSI) has been used in conjunction with virtual microscopy (VM) for training or proficiency testing purposes, multicentre research, remote frozen section diagnosis and to seek specialist second opinion in a number of organ systems. The feasibility of using WSI/VM for routine surgical pathology reporting has also been explored. In this review, we discuss the utility and limitations of WSI/VM technology in the histological assessment of specimens from the prostate. Features of WSI/VM that are particularly well suited to assessment of prostate pathology include the ability to examine images at different magnifications as well as to view histology and immunohistochemistry side-by-side on the screen. Use of WSI/VM would also solve the difficulty in obtaining multiple identical copies of small lesions in prostate biopsies for teaching and proficiency testing. It would also permit annotation of the virtual slides, and has been used in a study of inter-observer variation of Gleason grading to facilitate precise identification of the foci on which grading decisions had been based. However, the large number of sections examined from each set of prostate biopsies would greatly increase time required for scanning as well as the size of the digital file, and would also be an issue if digital archiving of prostate biopsies is contemplated. Z-scanning of glass slides, a process that increases scanning time and file size would be required to permit focusing a virtual slide up and down to assess subtle nuclear features such as nucleolar prominence. The common use of large blocks to process prostatectomy specimens would also be an issue, as few currently available scanners can scan such blocks. A major component of proficiency testing of prostate biopsy assessment involves screening of the cores to detect small atypical foci. However, screening virtual slides of wavy fragmented prostate cores using a computer mouse aided by an overview image is very different from screening glass slides using a microscope stage. Hence, it may be more appropriate in this setting to mark the lesional area and focus only on the interpretation component of competency testing. Other issues limiting the use of digital pathology in prostate pathology include the cost of high quality slide scanners for WSI and high resolution monitors for VM as well as the requirement for fast Internet connection as even a subtle delay in presentation of images on the screen may be very disturbing for a pathologist used to the rapid viewing of glass slides under a microscope. However, these problems are likely to be overcome by technological advances in the future.
    Apmis 04/2012; 120(4):298-304. · 2.07 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The histopathological examination of a prostate biopsy is the basis of prostate cancer diagnostics. Prostate cancer grade and extent of cancer in the diagnostic biopsy are important determinants of patient management. Quality of the prostate biopsy and its processing may influence the outcome of the histopathological evaluation. Further, an unambiguous and concise pathology reporting is essential for an appropriate clinical decision process. Since our initial report in 2003, there have been several practice changes, including the increased uptake of follow-up biopsies of patients who are under active surveillance, increasingly taken under guidance of MRI, or who underwent a prostate-sparing therapy. Therefore, we investigated the literature on the current pathology practices and recommendations with regard to prostate biopsy processing and reporting, both at initial diagnosis and in the context of follow-up biopsies in order to update our guidelines on the optimal processing and reporting of prostate biopsies.
    Archiv für Pathologische Anatomie und Physiologie und für Klinische Medicin 08/2013; · 2.68 Impact Factor


Available from
May 21, 2014