Ingeholm P, Pedersen L, Holck S
Department of Pathology, Hillerød Hospital, Hillerød, Denmark.
Breast. 1999 Oct;8(5):251-6. doi: 10.1054/brst.1999.0057.
The density profile of microvessels (MVD) has recently emerged as a prognostically independent morphological marker of various malignancies, including carcinoma of the breast. MVD-scoring may thus afford the pathologist the opportunity to identify subsets of early stage breast cancer patients, which may benefit from adjuvant therapy. Reproducibility studies are, however, mandatory. Fifty sections of invasive breast carcinoma, immunolabelled for Factor VIII-related antigen, were scored independently by two observers for the number of vessel-profiles (v-p) in the following manner: 1) 250 randomly selected high power fields (HPF) were scored by two analysts to evaluate the agreement of the counting per se; and 2) the hot spot(s), i.e. the zones considered the most vessel rich, in the 50 sections were identified and scored twice to evaluate the agreement on selecting hot spots. When the observers evaluated MVD in the very same 250 HPF a median deviation of 2 v-p (10%) was produced. The interobserver disparity was further accentuated when the participants independently had to identify the hot spots with a median deviation of 6 v-p (13%). Intraobserver variation was approximately equal to the interobserver discordance. Divergences were most conspicuous in fields with a complex vasculature. In conclusion the v-p scoring resulted in substantial inter- and intraobserver variation both in selecting hot spots and in performing the scoring per se. Alternative-scoring techniques, including strict stereological principles, should be considered in the morphological evaluation of angiogenesis.
微血管密度(MVD)最近已成为包括乳腺癌在内的各种恶性肿瘤的一种具有独立预后意义的形态学标志物。因此,MVD评分可为病理学家提供机会,以识别可能从辅助治疗中获益的早期乳腺癌患者亚组。然而,重复性研究是必不可少的。对50例浸润性乳腺癌切片进行因子VIII相关抗原免疫标记,由两名观察者以以下方式独立对血管轮廓(v-p)数量进行评分:1)两名分析人员对250个随机选择的高倍视野(HPF)进行评分,以评估计数本身的一致性;2)识别50个切片中的热点区域,即被认为血管最丰富的区域,并进行两次评分,以评估在选择热点区域方面的一致性。当观察者对完全相同的250个HPF评估MVD时,产生的中位偏差为2个v-p(10%)。当参与者独立识别热点区域时,观察者间的差异进一步加大,中位偏差为6个v-p(13%)。观察者内变异与观察者间不一致性大致相当。在血管系统复杂的区域,差异最为明显。总之,v-p评分在选择热点区域和进行评分本身时,均导致观察者间和观察者内存在显著差异。在血管生成的形态学评估中,应考虑采用包括严格立体学原理在内的替代评分技术。