• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

普通病理学家对前列腺腺癌进行Gleason分级的观察者间可重复性。

Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma among general pathologists.

作者信息

Singh R V, Agashe S R, Gosavi A V, Sulhyan K R

机构信息

Department of Pathology, Tarini Cancer Hospital, Alwar, Rajasthan, India.

出版信息

Indian J Cancer. 2011 Oct-Dec;48(4):488-95. doi: 10.4103/0019-509X.92277.

DOI:10.4103/0019-509X.92277
PMID:22293266
Abstract

CONTEXT

Gleason grade is the most widely used grading system for prostatic carcinoma and is recommended by World Health Organization. It is essential that there should be good interobserver reproducibility of this grading system as it has important implications in patient management.

AIM

To assess interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma.

DESIGN

A total of 20 cases of prostatic adenocarcinoma were scored using Gleason grade by 21 general pathologists. The scores were then compared using κ-coefficient and consensus score.

RESULTS

For Gleason score groups (2-4, 5-6, 7 and 8-10) overall agreement with consensus score was 68%. Exact agreement for Gleason scores with consensus score was 43.3% and 92.3% within ±1 of the consensus score. κ coefficient for primary grade ranged from -0.32 to 0.92 with 60% of the readings in fair to moderate agreement range; and for secondary grade κ ranged from -0.30 to 0.62 with 78% of the readings in slight to fair agreement range. Kappa for Gleason scores ranged from -0.13 to 0.55 with 80% of the readings in slight to fair agreement range; and for Gleason score groups κ ranged from -0.11 to 0.82 with 68.5% of the readings in fair to moderate agreement range.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study interobserver reproducibility of Gleason scores among general pathologists was at lower level and it highlights the need to improve the observer reproducibility by continuous educational sessions and taking second opinion in cases where grade could significantly influence management.

摘要

背景

Gleason分级是前列腺癌最广泛使用的分级系统,且被世界卫生组织推荐。该分级系统在患者管理中具有重要意义,因此观察者间具有良好的可重复性至关重要。

目的

评估前列腺腺癌Gleason分级的观察者间可重复性。

设计

21名普通病理学家使用Gleason分级对20例前列腺腺癌病例进行评分。然后使用κ系数和一致性评分对评分进行比较。

结果

对于Gleason评分组(2 - 4分、5 - 6分、7分和8 - 10分),与一致性评分的总体一致性为68%。Gleason评分与一致性评分的完全一致性在一致性评分的±1范围内分别为43.3%和92.3%。主要分级的κ系数范围为 - 0.32至0.92,60%的读数处于中等程度的一致性范围;次要分级的κ系数范围为 - 0.30至0.62,78%的读数处于轻微至中等程度的一致性范围。Gleason评分的kappa范围为 - 0.13至0.55,80%的读数处于轻微至中等程度的一致性范围;对于Gleason评分组,κ系数范围为 - 0.11至0.82,68.5%的读数处于中等程度的一致性范围。

结论

在我们的研究中,普通病理学家之间Gleason评分的观察者间可重复性处于较低水平,这突出表明需要通过持续的教育课程以及在分级可能对管理产生重大影响的病例中寻求第二种意见来提高观察者的可重复性。

相似文献

1
Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma among general pathologists.普通病理学家对前列腺腺癌进行Gleason分级的观察者间可重复性。
Indian J Cancer. 2011 Oct-Dec;48(4):488-95. doi: 10.4103/0019-509X.92277.
2
Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: urologic pathologists.前列腺癌Gleason分级的观察者间可重复性:泌尿外科病理学家。
Hum Pathol. 2001 Jan;32(1):74-80. doi: 10.1053/hupa.2001.21134.
3
Interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: general pathologist.前列腺癌Gleason分级的观察者间再现性:普通病理学家
Hum Pathol. 2001 Jan;32(1):81-8. doi: 10.1053/hupa.2001.21135.
4
A comparison of interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma in Japan and the United States.日本与美国前列腺癌Gleason分级观察者间可重复性的比较。
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005 Aug;129(8):1004-10. doi: 10.5858/2005-129-1004-ACOIRO.
5
Inter-observer reproducibility before and after web-based education in the Gleason grading of the prostate adenocarcinoma among the Iranian pathologists.伊朗病理学家中前列腺腺癌Gleason分级的网络教育前后观察者间的可重复性
Acta Med Iran. 2014;52(5):370-4.
6
Interobserver variability in Gleason histological grading of prostate cancer.前列腺癌Gleason组织学分级的观察者间变异性。
Scand J Urol. 2016 Dec;50(6):420-424. doi: 10.1080/21681805.2016.1206619. Epub 2016 Jul 14.
7
Measuring interobserver variation in a pathology EQA scheme using weighted κ for multiple readers.使用加权 κ 测量多位读者病理室间质评方案中的观察者间变异。
J Clin Pathol. 2011 Dec;64(12):1128-31. doi: 10.1136/jclinpath-2011-200229. Epub 2011 Aug 11.
8
Gleason grading of prostate cancer: level of concordance between pathologists at the University Hospital of the West Indies.西印度群岛大学医院病理学家之间前列腺癌Gleason分级的一致性水平
Am J Clin Pathol. 2004 Sep;122(3):373-6. doi: 10.1309/3A32-DTVM-H640-M2QA.
9
[Reproducibility of malignancy grading in prostatic cancers using the Gleason-Böckling system].[使用格利森-伯克灵系统对前列腺癌恶性程度分级的可重复性]
Orv Hetil. 1997 May 11;138(19):1195-9.
10
Evaluation of the interobserver reproducibility of Gleason grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma using tissue microarrays.使用组织微阵列评估前列腺腺癌Gleason分级的观察者间再现性。
Hum Pathol. 2003 May;34(5):444-9. doi: 10.1016/s0046-8177(03)00123-0.

引用本文的文献

1
Do explainable AI (XAI) methods improve the acceptance of AI in clinical practice? An evaluation of XAI methods on Gleason grading.可解释人工智能(XAI)方法能否提高人工智能在临床实践中的接受度?对XAI方法在 Gleason分级中的评估。
J Pathol Clin Res. 2025 Mar;11(2):e70023. doi: 10.1002/2056-4538.70023.
2
Unexpectedly high variability in determining tumour extent in prostatic biopsies: implications for active surveillance.前列腺活检中确定肿瘤范围时意外出现的高变异性:对主动监测的影响
Histopathology. 2025 Mar;86(4):627-639. doi: 10.1111/his.15372. Epub 2024 Nov 28.
3
Validation and three years of clinical experience in using an artificial intelligence algorithm as a second read system for prostate cancer diagnosis-real-world experience.
将人工智能算法用作前列腺癌诊断二次阅读系统的验证及三年临床经验——真实世界经验
J Pathol Inform. 2024 Apr 30;15:100378. doi: 10.1016/j.jpi.2024.100378. eCollection 2024 Dec.
4
Visual Assessment of 2-Dimensional Levels Within 3-Dimensional Pathology Data Sets of Prostate Needle Biopsies Reveals Substantial Spatial Heterogeneity.前列腺针吸活检的三维病理数据集的二维水平的直观评估揭示了显著的空间异质性。
Lab Invest. 2023 Dec;103(12):100265. doi: 10.1016/j.labinv.2023.100265. Epub 2023 Oct 18.
5
Grade Group accuracy is improved by extensive prostate biopsy sampling, but unrelated to prostatectomy specimen sampling or use of immunohistochemistry.前列腺活检样本的广泛采集可提高分级分组的准确性,但与前列腺切除术标本的采集或免疫组织化学无关。
Pathol Oncol Res. 2023 Jun 21;29:1611157. doi: 10.3389/pore.2023.1611157. eCollection 2023.
6
Concordance between biparametric MRI, transperineal targeted plus systematic MRI-ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy, and radical prostatectomy pathology.双参数 MRI、经会阴靶向加系统 MRI-超声融合前列腺活检与根治性前列腺切除术病理的一致性。
Sci Rep. 2022 Apr 28;12(1):6964. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-10672-4.
7
Substantial Gleason reclassification in Black men with national comprehensive cancer network low-risk prostate cancer - A propensity score analysis.黑人男性中全国综合癌症网络低危前列腺癌中明显的格里森分级再分类 - 倾向评分分析。
Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2022 Sep;25(3):547-552. doi: 10.1038/s41391-022-00510-z. Epub 2022 Feb 23.
8
Interchangeability of light and virtual microscopy for histopathological evaluation of prostate cancer.光学显微镜和虚拟显微镜在前列腺癌组织病理学评估中的可互换性。
Sci Rep. 2021 Feb 5;11(1):3257. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-82911-z.
9
Epithelial splicing regulatory protein 1 and 2 (ESRP1 and ESRP2) upregulation predicts poor prognosis in prostate cancer.上皮剪接调节蛋白 1 和 2(ESRP1 和 ESRP2)上调预示前列腺癌预后不良。
BMC Cancer. 2020 Dec 18;20(1):1220. doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-07682-8.
10
A narrative review of digital pathology and artificial intelligence: focusing on lung cancer.数字病理学与人工智能的叙述性综述:聚焦于肺癌
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2020 Oct;9(5):2255-2276. doi: 10.21037/tlcr-20-591.