A quantitative model using mean and standard deviation for evaluation of interobserver agreement in nuclear atypia scoring of breast carcinomas in a protocol study

Pathology International

Volumn 50, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 119-125

  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 agreement; Nuclear atypia; Protocol study

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; FEMALE; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCORING SYSTEM;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CELL NUCLEUS; CLINICAL PROTOCOLS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; OBSERVER VARIATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STATISTICS;

EID: 0034059597     PISSN: 13205463     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1440-1827.2000.01017.x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. 1 Bloom HJG, Richardson WW. Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer 1957; 11: 359-377.
2. 2 Campanacci M, Bertoni F, Bacchini P, Enneking WF, Notini S. Liposarcoma. Bone and Soft Tissue Tumors (English Translation from Italian) Springer Verlag, Wien, 1990; 917-933.
3. 3 Gompel C, Silverberg SG. The corpus uteri. Pathology in Gynecology and Obstetrics, 4th edn. JB Lippincott, Philadelphia, 1994; 241-257.
4. 4 Craig JR, Peters RL, Edmondson HA. Tumors of the Liver and Intrahepatic Bile Ducts. Atlas of Tumor Pathology, 2nd series. Fascicle 26. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington DC, 1989;153-164.
5. 5 Skinner DG, Colvin RB, Vermillion CD, Pfister RC, Leadbetter WF. Diagnosis and management of renal cell carcinoma: a clinical and pathological study of 309 cases. Cancer (Philadelphia PA) 1971; 28: 1165-1177.
6. 6 Gleason DF. Histologic grading of prostatic carcinoma. In: Bostwick DG, ed. Pathology of the Prostate. Contemporary Issues in Surgical Pathology, Vol 15. Churchill Livingstone, New York, 1990; 83-93.
7. 7 Zulch KJ. Biological behavior and grading (prognosis). Brain Tumors. Their Biology and Pathology, 3rd edn. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986; 27-40.
8. 8 Koss LG. Tumors of the Urinary Bladder. Atlas of Tumor Pathology, 2nd series, Fascicle 11. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington DC, 1975; 16-43.
9. 9 Watanabe T. Protocol for clinical trials (1). Phase III randomized comparison of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with 2-year oral UFT (uracil/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.
10. 10 Tsuda H, Akiyama F, Kurosumi M, Sakamoto G, Watanabe T, for NSAS-BC pathology section. Establishment of histological criteria for high-risk node-negative breast carcinoma for the Japan National Surgical Adjuvant Study of Breast Cancer (NSAS-BC) protocol. Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol. 1998; 28: 486-491.
11. 11 Tsuda H, Akiyama F, Kurosumi M, Sakamoto G, Watanabe T. Japan National Surgical Adjuvant Study of Breast Cancer (NSAS-BC) Pathology Section. The efficacy and limitations of repeated slide conferences for improving interobserver agreement when judging nuclear atypia of breast cancer. Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol. 1999; 29: 68-73.
12. 12 Tsuda H, Akiyama F, Kurosumi M, Sakamoto G, Watanabe T, Japan National Surgical Adjuvant Study of Breast Cancer (NSAS-BC) pathology section. Monitoring of interobserver agreement in nuclear atypia scoring of node-negative breast carcinomas judged at individual collaborating hospitals in the National surgical adjuvant study of breast cancer (NSAS-BC) protocol. Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol. 1999; 29: 413-420.
13. 13 Fleiss JL. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol. Bull. 1971; 76: 378-382.
14. 14 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-174.
15. 15 Kraemer HC. Extension of the kappa coefficient. Biometrics 1980; 36: 207-216.