Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
J Urol. 2010 Mar;183(3):952-7. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.11.024. Epub 2010 Jan 18.
Pathological assessment of radical prostatectomy specimens has not been uniform among pathologists. We investigated interobserver variability of radical prostatectomy specimen reviews between local and central pathologists.
We collated data from 50 institutions on 2,015 patients with cT1c-3 prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy between 1997 and 2005. All radical prostatectomy specimens were retrospectively reevaluated by a central uropathologist. Gleason score, extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion, lymph node involvement, positive surgical margin, year of diagnosis and pathology volume were recorded.
The exact concordance rate of Gleason score between local and central review was 54.8%, and under grading and over grading rates at local review were 25.9% and 19.2%, respectively. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was 0.61 for local and central radical prostatectomy Gleason score. The exact concordance rate of Gleason score 8-10 at local review was significantly lower than that of Gleason score 5-6, 3 + 4 and 4 + 3 at local review (p = 0.011, <0.001 and 0.006). Exact concordance rates between local and central review for extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion, lymph node involvement and positive surgical margin were 82.5%, 97.6%, 99.6% and 87.5%, respectively. High volume institutions and recently diagnosed cohorts showed significantly higher exact concordance rates between local and central review for radical prostatectomy Gleason score and other pathological features (all p <0.001).
High volume institutions and recent series show higher concordance between local and central review of radical prostatectomy pathology. However, concordance for high grade Gleason score, extracapsular extension and surgical margin status remains poor. Radical prostatectomy specimens should be reevaluated in a multi-institutional study for more accurate pathological data.
前列腺根治性切除术标本的病理评估在病理学家之间并不统一。我们研究了当地和中心病理学家对前列腺根治性切除术标本的复查结果的观察者间变异性。
我们收集了 1997 年至 2005 年间 50 家机构的 2015 例 cT1c-3 期前列腺癌患者的数据,所有前列腺根治性切除术标本均由一位中心泌尿科病理学家进行回顾性重新评估。记录 Gleason 评分、包膜外侵犯、精囊侵犯、淋巴结受累、阳性手术切缘、诊断年份和病理体积。
局部和中央复查的 Gleason 评分完全一致率为 54.8%,局部复查的低估和高估率分别为 25.9%和 19.2%。局部和中央前列腺根治性切除术 Gleason 评分的 Spearman 等级相关系数为 0.61。局部复查 Gleason 评分 8-10 的完全一致率明显低于 Gleason 评分 5-6、3+4 和 4+3(p=0.011、<0.001 和 0.006)。局部和中央复查包膜外侵犯、精囊侵犯、淋巴结受累和阳性手术切缘的完全一致率分别为 82.5%、97.6%、99.6%和 87.5%。高容量机构和最近诊断的队列显示,局部和中央复查前列腺根治性切除术 Gleason 评分和其他病理特征的完全一致率显著更高(均 p<0.001)。
高容量机构和近期系列研究显示,局部和中央复查前列腺根治性切除术病理的一致性更高。然而,Gleason 评分高、包膜外侵犯和手术切缘状态的一致性仍然较差。为了获得更准确的病理数据,应在多机构研究中重新评估前列腺根治性切除术标本。