From the Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (Drs Krishnamurthy, Gilcrease, and Albarracin and Mr Bassett); the Laboratory Diagnostics Medical Group, Scripps Memorial Hospital, La Jolla, California (Drs Mathews, Spinosa, and Chang); the Department of Pathology and Lab Medicine, Presbyterian Hospital, Charlotte, North Carolina (Drs McClure, Holt, and Cohen); the Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York (Drs Murray and Giri); Genoptix Medical Laboratory, Carlsbad, California (Dr Ho); the Department of Pathology, University of California at San Francisco School of Medicine (Dr Garg); and MileStone Research Organization, San Diego, California (Dr Liang).
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013 Dec;137(12):1733-9. doi: 10.5858/arpa.2012-0437-OA. Epub 2013 Aug 15.
Whole slide imaging (WSI) is now used for educational purposes, for consultation, and for archiving and quantitation of immunostains. However, it is not routinely used for the primary diagnosis of hematoxylin-eosin-stained tissue sections.
To compare WSI using the Aperio digital pathology system (Aperio Technologies, Inc, Vista, California) with optical microscopy (OM) for the interpretation of hematoxylin-eosin-stained tissue sections of breast lesions.
The study was conducted at 3 clinical sites; 3 breast pathologists interpreted 150 hematoxylin-eosin-stained slides at each site, 3 times each by WSI and 3 times each by OM. For WSI, slides were scanned using an Aperio ScanScope and interpreted on a computer monitor using Aperio ImageScope software and Aperio Spectrum data management software. Pathologic interpretations were recorded using the College of American Pathologists breast checklist. WSI diagnoses were compared with OM diagnoses for accuracy, precision (interpathologist variation), and reproducibility (intrapathologist variation). Results were considered accurate only if the interpretation matched exactly between WSI and OM. The proportion of accurate results reported by each pathologist was expressed as a percentage for the comparison of the 2 platforms.
The accuracy of WSI for classifying lesions as not carcinoma or as noninvasive (ductal or lobular) or invasive (ductal, lobular, or other) carcinoma was 90.5%. The accuracy of OM was 92.1%. The precision and reproducibility of WSI and OM were determined on the basis of pairwise comparisons (3 comparisons for each slide, resulting in 36 possible comparisons). The overall precision of WSI was 90.5% in comparison with 92.1% for OM; reproducibility of WSI was 91.6% in comparison with 94.5% for OM, respectively.
In this study, we demonstrated that WSI and OM have similar accuracy, precision, and reproducibility for interpreting hematoxylin-eosin-stained breast tissue sections. Further clinical studies using routine surgical pathology specimens would be useful to confirm these findings and facilitate the incorporation of WSI into diagnostic practice.
全切片成像(WSI)现在被用于教育目的、咨询以及存档和免疫染色的定量分析。然而,它并未常规用于苏木精-伊红染色组织切片的主要诊断。
比较使用 Aperio 数字病理学系统(Aperio 技术公司,加利福尼亚 Vista)与光学显微镜(OM)对乳腺病变的苏木精-伊红染色组织切片的解释。
该研究在 3 个临床地点进行;3 名乳腺病理学家在每个地点的 3 次中,每次均使用 WSI 和 OM 各 3 次来解释 150 张苏木精-伊红染色的载玻片。对于 WSI,使用 Aperio ScanScope 扫描载玻片,并在计算机监视器上使用 Aperio ImageScope 软件和 Aperio Spectrum 数据管理软件进行解释。使用美国病理学家学院的乳腺检查表记录病理解释。比较 WSI 诊断与 OM 诊断的准确性、精密度(不同病理学家间的差异)和可重复性(同一病理学家内的差异)。只有当 WSI 和 OM 之间的解释完全匹配时,才认为结果是准确的。报告的准确性结果由每位病理学家表示为两种平台比较的百分比。
WSI 分类病变为非癌或非浸润性(导管或小叶)或浸润性(导管、小叶或其他)癌的准确率为 90.5%。OM 的准确率为 92.1%。基于两两比较(每张切片 3 次比较,共 36 次可能的比较)确定了 WSI 和 OM 的精密度和可重复性。WSI 的整体精密度为 90.5%,OM 为 92.1%;WSI 的可重复性为 91.6%,OM 为 94.5%。
在这项研究中,我们证明 WSI 和 OM 对解释苏木精-伊红染色的乳腺组织切片具有相似的准确性、精密度和可重复性。使用常规外科病理标本进行进一步的临床研究将有助于证实这些发现,并促进 WSI 纳入诊断实践。