Reproducibility of mitosis counting in 2,469 breast cancer specimens: results from the Multicenter Morphometric Mammary Carcinoma Project.

The Multicenter Morphometric Mammary Carcinoma Project is a prospective study on the reproducibility and prognostic value of routine quantitative assessments, especially the mitotic activity index (MAI), the multivariate prognostic index (MPI; a combination of MAI, tumor size, and lymph node status), the mean nuclear area, and DNA ploidy assessments in patients with invasive breast cancer. Fourteen pathology laboratories providing routine services to 35 hospitals throughout The Netherlands are participating in this project. In this article, the reproducibility of MAI and MPI assessments is described. Assessment of the MAI was, according to a strict protocol, first performed in the participating laboratories; thereafter, slides were transferred to the coordination center in Amsterdam for quality control. Analysis of the reproducibility of the assessments in 2,469 patients showed correlation coefficients between 0.81 and 0.96 (mean, 0.91) for the MAI and between 0.91 and 0.97 (mean, 0.96) for the MPI. The reproducibility was fairly constant in time, although it showed a slight drop in the middle of the 2-year intake period. A prognostically relevant discrepancy in MPI (caused by differences in MAI) between the original and quality control assessments was found in only 7.2% of the cases. When analyzing the reasons for these discrepancies, a plausible explanation could be found in all cases: bad tissue processing and ignorance of or negligence in following the protocol guidelines for selection of the counting area or in the process of counting were the most important flaws. Since these errors are largely controllable, an even lower discrepancy rate is theoretically achievable. In conclusion, in a routine setting it can be learned, within a reasonable time, to perform mitosis counting in a highly reproducible way if a strict protocol is carefully followed. This opens the way for a wider application of the MAI and MPI in breast cancer patients. Motivation is, however, an important factor to obtain reproducible results, and ongoing quality control is essential to guarantee the reproducibility of the assessments.

[1]  J. Baak Manual of quantitative pathology in cancer diagnosis and prognosis , 1991 .

[2]  G. Garas,et al.  Intralaboratory variations in the grading of breast carcinoma. , 1982, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[3]  J. Baak,et al.  Further evaluation of the prognostic value of morphometric and flow cytometric parameters in breast‐cancer patients with long follow‐up , 1990, International journal of cancer.

[4]  J. Baak,et al.  Prospective evaluation of prognostic value of morphometry in patients with primary breast cancer. , 1987, Journal of clinical pathology.

[5]  J. Baak,et al.  The value of morphometry to classic prognosticators in breast cancer , 1985, Cancer.

[6]  P. V. van Diest,et al.  The morphometric prognostic index is the strongest prognosticator in premenopausal lymph node-negative and lymph node-positive breast cancer patients. , 1991, Human pathology.

[7]  J. Vegelius,et al.  Analysis of reproducibility of subjective grading systems for breast carcinoma. , 1979, Journal of clinical pathology.

[8]  J. Baak,et al.  Mitosis counting in tumors. , 1990, Human pathology.

[9]  P. Barbini,et al.  Correlation between morphometrical parameters and disease-free survival in ductal breast cancer treated only by surgery. , 1986, Applied pathology.

[10]  P. V. van Diest,et al.  The Multicenter Morphometric Mammary Carcinoma Project (MMMCP). A nationwide prospective study on reproducibility and prognostic power of routine quantitative assessments in The Netherlands. , 1989, Pathology, research and practice.

[11]  J. Baak,et al.  Limited prognostic value of cellular DNA content to classical and morphometrical parameters in invasive ductal breast cancer. , 1988, American journal of clinical pathology.

[12]  J. Baak,et al.  The Multivariate Prognostic Index and nuclear DNA content are independent prognostic factors in primary breast cancer patients. , 1989, Cytometry.

[13]  P. V. van Diest,et al.  Data processing and analysis in the Multicenter Morphometric Mammary Carcinoma Project (MMMCP). , 1989, Pathology, research and practice.

[14]  V. Budach,et al.  Changes in mitotic rate and cell cycle fractions caused by delayed fixation. , 1990, Human pathology.