Impact of a national external quality assessment scheme for breast pathology in the UK

Background: This article presents the results and observed effects of the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) external quality assurance scheme in breast histopathology. Aims/Methods: The major objectives were to monitor and improve the consistency of diagnoses made by pathologists and the quality of prognostic information in pathology reports. The scheme is based on a twice yearly circulation of 12 cases to over 600 registered participants. The level of agreement was generally measured using κ statistics. Results: Four main situations were encountered with respect to diagnostic consistency, namely: (1) where consistency is naturally very high—this included diagnosing in situ and invasive carcinomas (and certain distinctive subtypes) and uncomplicated benign lesions; (2) where the level of consistency was low but could be improved by making guidelines more detailed and explicit—this included histological grading; (3) where consistency could be improved but only by changing the system of classification—this included classification of ductal carcinoma in situ; and (4) where no improvement in consistency could be achieved—this included diagnosing atypical hyperplasia and reporting vascular invasion. Size measurements were more consistent for invasive than in situ carcinomas. Even in cases where there is a high level of agreement on tumour size, a few widely outlying measurements were encountered, for which no explanation is readily forthcoming. Conclusions: These results broadly confirm the robustness of the systems of breast disease diagnosis and classification adopted by the NHSBSP, and also identify areas where improvement or new approaches are required.

[1]  K. Zedeler,et al.  Inter- and intraobserver variability in the histopathological diagnosis of medullary carcinoma of the breast, and its prognostic implications , 1989, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[2]  S. Singletary,et al.  Standard for Breast Conservation Therapy in the Management of Invasive Breast Carcinoma , 2002, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[3]  I. Ellis,et al.  Implications of pathologist concordance for breast cancer assessments in mammography screening from age 40 years. , 2002, Human pathology.

[4]  J. Peterse,et al.  Causes of inconsistency in diagnosing and classifying intraductal proliferations of the breast. European Commission Working Group on Breast Screening Pathology. , 2000, European journal of cancer.

[5]  I. Ellis,et al.  Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. , 1999, Critical reviews in oncology/hematology.

[6]  A. Gad,et al.  Consistency achieved by 23 European pathologists from 12 countries in diagnosing breast disease and reporting prognostic features of carcinomas , 1999, Virchows Archiv.

[7]  I. Ellis,et al.  Prediction of local recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast using five histological classifications: a comparative study with long follow-up. , 1998, Human pathology.

[8]  S. Pinder,et al.  Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. III. Vascular invasion: relationship with recurrence and survival in a large study with long‐term follow‐up , 1994, Histopathology.

[9]  J. Davies,et al.  Consistency of histopathological reporting of breast lesions detected by screening: findings of the U.K. National External Quality Assessment (EQA) Scheme. U. K. National Coordinating Group for Breast Screening Pathology. , 1994, European journal of cancer.

[10]  A. Gentile,et al.  Medullary carcinoma of the breast. A multicenter study of its diagnostic consistency. , 1993, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[11]  S J Schnitt,et al.  Interobserver Reproducibility in the Diagnosis of Ductal Proliferative Breast Lesions Using Standardized Criteria , 1992, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[12]  D. Page,et al.  Combined histologic and cytologic criteria for the diagnosis of mammary atypical ductal hyperplasia. , 1992, Human pathology.

[13]  A. Silman,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing observer variability in clinical measures. , 1992, BMJ.

[14]  J. Davies,et al.  Pathology reporting in breast cancer screening. Royal College of Pathologists Working Group. , 1991, Journal of clinical pathology.

[15]  J. Rosai,et al.  Borderline Epithelial Lesions of the Breast , 1991, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[16]  S. Schnitt,et al.  Pathologic predictors of early local recurrence in stage I and II breast cancer treated by primary radiation therapy , 1984, Cancer.

[17]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[18]  W. W. Richardson Medullary Carcinoma of the Breast , 1956, British Journal of Cancer.