Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of flat epithelial atypia of the breast

Modern Pathology

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 172-179

  O'Malley, Frances P ^a,i   Mohsin, Syed K ^b   Badve, Sunil ^c   Bose, Shikha ^d   Collins, Laura C ^e   Ennis, Marguerite ^f   Kleer, Celina G ^g   Pinder, Sarah E ^h   Schnitt, Stuart J ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b RIVERSIDE METHODIST HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d CEDARS SINAI MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^f Applied Statistician   (Canada)

^g UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^h CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

ⁱ MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Breast; Columnar cell hyperplasia; Flat epithelial atypia; Interobserver reproducibility

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST DISEASE; CELL DAMAGE; CELL TRANSFORMATION; CELL TYPE; COLUMNAR CELL LESION; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FLAT EPITHELIUM ATYPIA; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGIST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCIBILITY;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; EPITHELIAL CELLS; FEMALE; HUMANS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY, CLINICAL; PRECANCEROUS CONDITIONS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 30944444172     PISSN: 08933952     EISSN: 15300285     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.3800514     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Warren JC. A plea for reciprocity as illustrated by the consideration of the classification and treatment of benign tumors of the breast. JAMA 1905;45:149-165.
2. Foote FW, Stewart FW. Comparative studies of cancerous vs non-cancerous breasts. Basic morphological characteristics. Ann Surg 1945;121: 6-53-197-222.
3. Fraser JL, Raza S, Chorny K, et al. Columnar alteration with prominent apical snouts and secretions: a spectrum of changes frequently present in breast biopsies performed for microcalcifications. Am J Surg Pathol 1998;22:1521-1527.
4. Wellings SR, Jensen HM, Marcum RG. An atlas of subgross pathology of the human breast with special reference to possible precancerous lesions. J Natl Cancer Inst 1975;55:231-273.
5. Goldstein NS, O'Malley BA. Cancerization of small ectatic ducts of the breast by ductal carcinoma in situ cells with apocrine snouts: a lesion associated with tubular carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol 1997;107:561-566.
6. Azzopardi JG. Problems in Breast Pathology. W.B. Saunders: Philadelphia, 1978, pp 193-202.
7. Eusebi V, Feudale E, Foschini MP, et al. Long-term follow-up of in situ carcinoma of the breast. Semin Diagn Pathol 1994;11:223-235.
8. Kasami M, Jensen RA, Simpson JF, et al. Lobulo-centricity of breast hypersecretory hyperplasia with cytologic atypia: infrequent association with carcinoma in situ. Am J Clin Pathol 2004;122:714-720.
9. Oyama T, Iijima K, Takei H, et al. Atypical cystic lobule of the breast: an early stage of low-grade ductal carcinoma in-situ. Breast Cancer 2000;7:326-331.
10. Page DL, Kasami M, Jensen RA. Hypersecretory hyperplasia with atypia in breast biopsies. Pathology Case Reviews 1996;1:36-40.
11. Schnitt S. Columnar cell lesions of the breast. Pathology Case Reviews 2003;8:201-210.
12. Schnitt SJ. The diagnosis and management of pre-invasive breast disease: flat epithelial atypia - classification, pathologic features and clinical significance. Breast Cancer Res 2003;5:263-268.
13. Schnitt SJ, Vincent-Salomon A. Columnar cell lesions of the breast. Adv Anat Pathol 2003;10:113-124.
14. Shaaban AM, Sloane JP, West CR, et al. Histopathologic types of benign breast lesions and the risk of breast cancer: case-control study. Am J Surg Pathol 2002;26:421-430.
15. Rosen PP. Rosen's Breast Pathology, 2nd edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Philadelphia, PA, 2001.
16. Tavassoli FA, Hoefler H, Rosai J, et al. Intraductal proliferative lesions. In: Tavassoli FA, Devilee P (eds). World Health Organization Classification of Tumours. Pathology and Genetics of Tumours of the Breast and Female Genital Organs. IARC Press: Lyon, France, 2003, pp 63-73.
17. Bijker N, Peterse JL, Duchateau L, et al. Risk factors for recurrence and metastasis after breast-conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma-in-situ: analysis of European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Trial 10853. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:2263-2271.
18. Moinfar F, Man YG, Bratthauer GL, et al. Genetic abnormalities in mammary ductal intraepithelial neoplasia-flat type ('clinging ductal carcinoma in situ'): a simulator of normal mammary epithelium. Cancer 2000;88:2072-2081.
19. Simpson PT, Gale T, Reis-Filho JS, et al. Columnar cell lesions of the breast: the missing link in breast cancer progression? A morphological and molecular analysis. Am J Surg Pathol 2005;29:734-746.
20. Eusebi V, Foschini MP, Cook MG, et al. Long-term follow-up of in situ carcinoma of the breast with special emphasis on clinging carcinoma. Semin Diagn Pathol 1989;6:165-173.
21. De Potter CR, Foschini MP, Schelfhout AM, et al. Immunohistochemical study of neu protein overexpression in clinging in situ duct carcinoma of the breast. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol 1993;422:375-380.
22. Rosen PP. Columnar cell hyperplasia is associated with lobular carcinoma in situ and tubular carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1999;23:1561.
23. Brogi E, Oyama T, Koerner FC. Atypical cystic lobules in patients with lobular neoplasia. Int J Surg Pathol 2001;9:201-206.
24. Fleiss JL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York, 1981.
25. Holman CD. Analysis of interobserver variation on a programmable calculator. Am J Epidemiol 1984;120:154-160.
26. Carpenter J, Bithell J. Bootstrap confidence intervals: when, which, what? A practical guide for medical statisticians. Stat Med 2000;19:1141-1164.
27. Tsuchiya S. Atypical ductal hyperplasia, atypical lobular hyperplasia and interpretation of a new borderline lesion. Jpn J Cancer Clin 1998;44:548-555.
28. Rosai J. Borderline epithelial lesions of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol 1991;15:209-221.
29. Palazzo J, Hyslop T. Hyperplastic ductal and lobular lesions and carcinoma in situ of the breast: Reproducibility of current diagnostic criteria among community and academic based pathologists. Breast J 1998;4:230-237.
30. Bodian CA, Perzin KH, Lattes R, et al. Reproducibility and validity of pathologic classifications of benign breast disease and implications for clinical applications [see comments]. Cancer 1993;71:3908-3913.
31. Palli D, Galli M, Bianchi S, et al. Reproducibility of histological diagnosis of breast lesions: results of a panel in Italy. Eur J Cancer 1996;32A:603-607.
32. Schnitt SJ, Connolly JL, Tavassoli FA, et al. Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of ductal proliferative breast lesions using standardized criteria [see comments]. Am J Surg Pathol 1992;16:1133-1143.
33. Sloane JP, Amendoeira I, Apostolikas N, et al. Consistency achieved by 23 European pathologists in categorizing ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast using five classifications. European Commission Working Group on Breast Screening Pathology. Hum Pathol 1998;29:1056-1062.