Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: general pathologist.

Only a few large studies of interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma exist. Thirty-eight biopsies containing prostate cancer were distributed for Gleason grading to 41 general pathologists in Georgia. These cases had "consensus" Gleason grade groups (2-4, 5-6, 7, and 8-10) that were agreed on by at least 7 of 10 urologic pathologists. The overall kappa (kappa) coefficient for interobserver agreement for these 38 cases was 0.435, barely moderate agreement, with a kappa range from 0.00 to 0.88. There was consistent undergrading of Gleason scores 5-6 (47%), 7 (47%) and, to a lesser extent, 8-10 (25%). In cases with consensus primary patterns, there was consistent undergrading of patterns 2 (32%), 3 (39%), and 5 (30%). Pattern 2 was often (17%) mistaken for pattern 3. Pattern 4 was often undergraded (21%) and also mistaken for pattern 5 (17%). The most significant (P < .005) demographic factor associated with better interobserver agreement was having learned Gleason grading at a meeting or course. We believe that Gleason grading can be learned to a satisfactory level of interobserver reproducibility and have undertaken additional studies that support this belief.

[1]  C. Pan,et al.  The prognostic significance of tertiary Gleason patterns of higher grade in radical prostatectomy specimens: a proposal to modify the Gleason grading system. , 2000, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[2]  M Bibbo,et al.  Correlation between visual clues, objective architectural features, and interobserver agreement in prostate cancer. , 1991, American journal of clinical pathology.

[3]  T. Stamey,et al.  Histologic differentiation, cancer volume, and pelvic lymph node metastasis in adenocarcinoma of the prostate , 1990, Cancer.

[4]  R. Thomas,et al.  Aid to accurate clinical staging-histopathologic grading in prostatic cancer. , 1982, The Journal of urology.

[5]  D. Bostwick,et al.  Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: urologic pathologists. , 2001, Human pathology.

[6]  A J Robertson,et al.  Observer variability in the histopathological reporting of needle biopsy specimens of the prostate. , 1997, Human pathology.

[7]  S J Cina,et al.  Pathology residents' use of a Web-based tutorial to improve Gleason grading of prostate carcinoma on needle biopsies. , 2000, Human pathology.

[8]  Gleason Df.  Classification of prostatic carcinomas. , 1966 .

[9]  S. Piantadosi,et al.  Correlation of prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason grade in academic and community settings. , 1997, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[10]  D. Bostwick,et al.  The pathologist as optimist: cancer grade deflation in prostatic needle biopsies. , 1998, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[11]  J. Epstein,et al.  Gleason score 2-4 adenocarcinoma of the prostate on needle biopsy: a diagnosis that should not be made. , 2000, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[12]  J. Srigley,et al.  Interobserver variation in prostate cancer Gleason scoring: are there implications for the design of clinical trials and treatment strategies? , 1997, Clinical oncology (Royal College of Radiologists (Great Britain)).

[13]  J. Bailar,et al.  The histology and prognosis of prostatic cancer. , 1967, The Journal of urology.

[14]  A. Chen,et al.  Is there a simultaneous involvement of membranous and IgA nephropathy in hepatitis B antigenemia? , 1988, Human pathology.

[15]  Jacob Cohen.  A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

[16]  H Svanholm,et al.  Prostatic carcinoma reproducibility of histologic grading. , 1985, Acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica. Section A, Pathology.

[17]  D. Gleason,et al.  Histologic grading of prostate cancer: a perspective. , 1992, Human pathology.

[18]  J. Epstein,et al.  A web‐based tutorial improves practicing pathologists' Gleason grading of images of prostate carcinoma specimens obtained by needle biopsy , 2000, Cancer.

[19]  D K Corle,et al.  Preliminary studies of histologic prognosis in cancer of the prostate. , 1977, Cancer treatment reports.

[20]  W. A. Gardner,et al.  A uniform histopathologic grading system for prostate cancer. Subcommittee on Diagnostic Nomenclature, Prostate Cancer Working Group, Organ Systems Program. , 1988, Human pathology.

[21]  A. Morenas,et al.  Prostatic adenocarcinoma: reproducibility and correlation with clinical stages of four grading systems. , 1988, Human pathology.

[22]  W. Johnson,et al.  Incidental prostatic carcinoma: tumor extent versus histologic grade. , 1982, Urology.

[23]  [Reproducibility and prognostic value of Gleason's and Gaeta's histological grades in prostatic carcinoma]. , 1986, Annales d'urologie.

[24]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Statistical methods for rates and proportions , 1973 .

[25]  The Gleason Grading System: An Overview , 1999 .