Interobserver variation in the diagnosis of adenoma malignum (minimal deviation adenocarcinoma) of the uterine cervix

Pathology International

Volumn 53, Issue 7, 2003, Pages 440-449

  Tsuda, Hitoshi ^a   Mikami, Yoshiki ^b   Kaku, Tsunehisa ^c   Akiyama, Futoshi ^d   Hasegawa, Tadashi ^e   Okada, Satoshi ^e   Hayashi, Isamu ^e   Kasamatsu, Takahiro ^e  

^a NATIONAL DEFENSE MEDICAL COLLEGE   (Japan)

^b KAWASAKI MEDICAL SCHOOL   (Japan)

^c KYUSHU UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^d CANCER INSTITUTE   (Japan)

^e NATIONAL CANCER CENTER HOSPITAL   (Japan)

Author keywords

Adenoma malignum (minimal deviation adenocarcinoma); Diagnosis; Interobserver agreement; Prognosis; Uterine cervix

Indexed keywords

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADENOMA MALIGNUM; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER INVASION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; HYPERPLASIA; MORTALITY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA;

ADENOCARCINOMA; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYPERPLASIA; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRECANCEROUS CONDITIONS; PROGNOSIS; SURVIVAL RATE; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 0042232203     PISSN: 13205463     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1440-1827.2003.01497.x     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Kaku T, Enjoji M. Extremely well-differentiated adenocarcinoma ('adenoma malignum') of the cervix. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1983; 2: 28-41.
2. McKelvey JL, Goodlin RR. Adenoma malignum of the cervix. A cancer of deceptively innocent histological pattern. Cancer 1963; 16: 549-57.
3. Silverberg SG, Hurt G. Minimal deviation adenocarcinoma (adenoma malignum) of the cervix: A reappraisal. Am J Obstetr Gynecol 1975; 121: 971-5.
4. Gilks CB, Young RH, Clement PB, Hart WR, Scully RE. Adenomyomas of the uterine cervix of endocervical type. A report of ten cases of a benign cervical tumor that may be confused with adenoma malignum [corrected]. Mod Pathol 1996; 9: 220-24.
5. Jones MA, Young RH, Scully RE. Diffuse laminar endocervical glandular hyperplasia. A benign lesion often confused with adenoma malignum (minimal deviation adenocarcinoma). Am J Surg Pathol 1991; 15: 1123-9.
6. Mikami Y, Hata S, Fujiwara K, Imajo Y, Kohno I, Manabe T. Florid endocervical glandular hyperplasia with intestinal and pyloric gland metaplasia: Worrisome benign mimic of 'adenoma malignum'. Gynecol Oncol 1999; 74: 504-11.
7. Nucci MR, Clement PB, Young RH. Lobular endocervical glandular hyperplasia, not otherwise specified: A clinicopathologic analysis of thirteen cases of a distinctive pseudoneoplastic lesion and comparison with fourteen cases of adenoma malignum. Am J Surg Pathol 1999; 23: 886-91.
8. Gilks CB, Young RH, Aguirre P, DeLellis RA, Scully RE. Adenoma malignum (minimal deviation adenocarcinoma) of the uterine cervix. Am J Surg Pathol 1989; 13: 717-29.
9. Hirai Y, Takeshima N, Haga A et al. A clinicocytopathologic study of adenoma malignum of the uterine cervix. Gynecol Oncol 1998; 70: 219-23.
10. Kurman RJ, Norris HJ, Wilkinson EJ. Tumors of the Cervix, Vagina, and Vulva. Atlas of Tumor Pathology, 3rd series. Washington, DC: Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, 1992; 91-3.
11. Tsuda H, Okada S, Kasamatsu T. Is florid pyloric metaplasia different from adenoma malignum? Gynecol Oncol 2000; 77: 341-2.
12. Fleiss JL. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull 1971; 76: 378-82.
13. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-74.
14. Light RJ. Measures of response agreement for qualitative data: Some generalizations and alterations. Psychol Bull 1971; 76: 365-77.
15. Tsuda H, Takarabe T, Okada S et al. Different pattern of loss of heterozygosity among endocervical-type adenocarcinoma, endometrioid-adenocarcinoma and adenoma malignum of the uterine cervix. Int J Cancer 2002; 98: 713-17.
16. Ota H, Hayama M, Nakayama J et al. Cell lineage specificity of newly raised monoclonal antibodies against gastric mucins in normal, metaplastic, and neoplastic human tissues and their application to pathology diagnosis. Am J Clin Pathol 2001; 115: 69-79.