The efficacy and limitations of repeated slide conferences for improving interobserver agreement when judging nuclear atypia of breast cancer

Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 29, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 68-73

  Tsuda, Hitoshi ^a   Akiyama, Futoshi ^b   Kurosumi, Masafumi ^c   Sakamoto, Goi ^b   Watanabe, Toru ^d  

^a NATIONAL CANCER CENTER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Japan)

^b CANCER INSTITUTE   (Japan)

^c SAITAMA CANCER CENTER   (Japan)

^d NATIONAL CANCER CENTER HOSPITAL   (Japan)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Interobserver variation; Intraobserver reproducibility; Nuclear atypia; Protocol study

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; CANCER STAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; OBSERVER VARIATION; ORGANIZATION; PATHOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARD;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONGRESSES; FEMALE; HUMANS; NEOPLASM STAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 0033072346     PISSN: 03682811     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jjco/29.2.68     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Watanabe T. Protocol for clinical trials (1). Phase III randomized comparison of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with 2-year oral UFT (tracil/tegafur) versus six-cycle CMF (cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/5-fluorouracil) in high-risk node-negative breast cancer patients. Jpn J Clin Oncol 1998;28:77-80.
2. Tsuda H, Akiyama F, Kurosumi M, Sakamoto G, Watanabe T. Japan national surgical adjuvant study of breast cancer. Establishment of histological criteria for high-risk node-negative breast carcinoma for a multi-institutional randomized clinical trial of adjuvant therapy. Jpn J Clin Oncol 1998;28:486-91.
3. Bloom HJG, Richardson WW. Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1957;11:359-77.
4. Elston C. Grading of invasive carcinoma of the breast. In: Page DL, Anderson TJ, editors. Diagnostic Histopathology of the Breast. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone 1987;300-11.
5. Fisher ER, Redmond C, Fisher B. Histological grading of breast cancer. Pathol Ann 1980;15:239-51.
6. Contesso G, Mouriesse H, Friedman S, Genin D, Sarrazin D, Rouesse J. The importance of histologic grade in long-term prognosis of breast cancer: a study of 1010 patients, uniformly treated at the Institut Gustave-Roussy. J Clin Oncol 1987;5:1378-86.
7. Tsuda H, Hirohashi S, Shimosato Y, Hirota T, Tsugane S, Watanabe S, et al. Correlation between histologic grade of malignancy and copy number of c-erbB-2 gene in breast carcinoma. Cancer 1990;65:1794-1800.
8. Stenkvist B, Westman-Naeser S, Vegelius J, Holmquist J, Nordin B, Bengtsson E, et al. Analysis of reproducibility of subjective grading systems for breast carcinoma. J Clin Pathol 1979;32:979-85.
9. Gilchrist KW, Kalish L, Gould VE, Hirschl S, Imbriglia JE, Levy WM, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of histopathological features in stage II breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1985;5:3-10.
10. Hopton DS, Thorogood J, Clayden AD, MacKinnon D. Observer variation in histological grading of breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 1989;15:21-3.
11. Theissig F, Kunze KD, Haroske G, Meyer W. Histological grading of breast cancer. Interobserver, reproducibility and prognostic significance. Pathol Res Pract 1990;186:732-6.
12. Harvey JM, DeKlerk NH, Sterrett GF. Histological grading in breast cancer: interobserver agreement and relation to other prognostic factors including ploidy. Pathology 1992;24:63-8.
13. Dalton LW, Page DL, Dupont WD. Histologic grading of breast carcinoma. A reproducibility study. Cancer 1994;73:2765-70.
14. Frierson HF Jr, Wolber RA, Berean KW, Franquemont DW, Gaffey MJ, Boyd JC, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of the Bloom and Richardson histologic grading scheme for infiltrating ductal carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol 1995;103:195-8.
15. Page DL, Ellis IO, Elston CW. Histologic grading of breast cancer. Am J Clin Pathol 1995;103:123-4 (editorial).
16. Fleiss JL. Measuing nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull 1971;76:378-82.
17. Fleiss JL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. New York: Wiley 1973:140-54.
18. Light RJ. Measures of response agreement for qualitative data: some generalizations and alterations. Psychol Bull 1971;76:365-77.
19. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-74.