Tsuda H, Akiyama F, Kurosumi M, Sakamoto G, Yamashiro K, Oyama T, Hasebe T, Kameyama K, Hasegawa T, Umemura S, Honma K, Ozawa T, Sasaki K, Morino H, Ohsumi S
Pathology Division, National Cancer Center Research Institute, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan.
Jpn J Cancer Res. 2000 Apr;91(4):451-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2000.tb00966.x.
In the National Surgical Adjuvant Study for Breast Cancer (NSAS-BC), node-negative breast cancers were divided into higher- and lower-risk groups according to the histopathological nuclear grade given at individual collaborating hospitals, and the higher-risk group was entered into a randomized protocol of adjuvant therapy. Because the nuclear grade was the composite of nuclear atypia and mitotic counts, maintenance of interobserver agreement in mitotic counts was indispensable for the success of the protocol study. Fourteen pathologists participating in the protocol judged whether or not 20 photomicrographs suspected of showing mitotic cancer-cell figures truly showed mitoses. After standardizing the counting method, these pathologists counted the number of mitotic figures per 10 high-power fields of hematoxylin-eosin-stained main-tissue sections of 20 tumors. Areas where mitotic counts were considered to be the most frequent by each pathologist were compared for these tumors. For the judgment of whether the photomicrograph indicated mitosis, the level of interobserver agreement was moderate (kappa = 0.569). In the observations of 20 tumors, interobserver agreement level of mitotic counts was moderate (kappa = 0.506), that of nuclear atypia scoring was fair (kappa = 0.265), and that of nuclear grading was substantial (kappa = 0.633). The counted area was almost the same among the observers in 9 tumors, split into two areas in 6, and dispersed in 5. Concordance in judgment was achieved in 7 of the first 9 and in all of the third 5, but only in one of the second 6. The cause of discordance was mostly derived from tumor heterogeneity and the difference in the site where mitoses were counted. Interobserver agreement level was considered to be satisfactory, and it was expected that the case entry would be performed appropriately in the protocol study. The selection of the counting area was confirmed to be important for the acquisition of high-level agreement level in mitotic counts.
在国家乳腺癌辅助手术研究(NSAS-BC)中,根据各协作医院给出的组织病理学核分级,将淋巴结阴性乳腺癌分为高风险组和低风险组,高风险组进入辅助治疗的随机方案。由于核分级是核异型性和有丝分裂计数的综合指标,因此在有丝分裂计数中保持观察者间的一致性对于方案研究的成功至关重要。参与该方案的14名病理学家判断20张疑似显示有丝分裂癌细胞图像的显微照片是否真的显示有丝分裂。在标准化计数方法后,这些病理学家对20个肿瘤苏木精-伊红染色主组织切片的每10个高倍视野中的有丝分裂图像数量进行计数。比较这些肿瘤中每位病理学家认为有丝分裂计数最频繁的区域。对于显微照片是否显示有丝分裂的判断,观察者间一致性水平为中等(kappa = 0.569)。在对20个肿瘤的观察中,有丝分裂计数的观察者间一致性水平为中等(kappa = 0.506),核异型性评分的一致性水平为一般(kappa = 0.265),核分级的一致性水平为较高(kappa = 0.633)。在9个肿瘤中,观察者之间的计数区域几乎相同,6个肿瘤的计数区域分为两个区域,5个肿瘤的计数区域分散。在前9个肿瘤中有7个在判断上达成了一致,后5个肿瘤全部达成一致,但中间6个肿瘤中只有1个达成一致。不一致的原因主要源于肿瘤异质性和有丝分裂计数部位的差异。观察者间一致性水平被认为是令人满意的,预计在方案研究中病例入选将适当进行。计数区域的选择对于获得有丝分裂计数的高水平一致性被证实是重要的。