Atypical ductal hyperplasia: Interobserver and intraobserver variability

Modern Pathology

Volumn 24, Issue 7, 2011, Pages 917-923

  Jain, Rohit K ^a   Mehta, Rutika ^a   Dimitrov, Rosen ^a   Larsson, Lisbeth G ^a   Musto, Paul M ^a   Hodges, Kurt B ^a   Ulbright, Thomas M ^a   Hattab, Eyas M ^a   Agaram, Narasimhan ^a   Idrees, Muhammad T ^a   Badve, Sunil ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

atypical ductal hyperplasia; ductal carcinoma in situ; immunohistochemistry; interobserver variation; usual ductal hyperplasia

Indexed keywords

KERATIN;

ARTICLE; ATYPICAL DUCTAL HYPERPLASIA; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; HYPERPLASIA; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; INTEROBSERVER VARIABILITY; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; INTRAOBSERVER VARIABILITY; MOLECULAR WEIGHT; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGIST; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 79959937342     PISSN: 08933952     EISSN: 15300285     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2011.66     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Ernster VL, Barclay J. Increases in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast in relation to mammography: a dilemma. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1997;(22): 151-156.
2. Ashikari R, Huvos AG, Snyder RE, et al. Proceedings: a clinicopathologic study of atypical lesions of the breast. Cancer 1974;33:310-317.
3. Ashikari R, Huvos AG, Snyder RE, et al. A clinicopathologic study of atypical lesions of the breast further follow up. Pathol Res Pract 1980;166:481-490. (Pubitemid 10064976)
4. Goldenberg VE, Goldenberg NS, Sommers SC. Comparative ultrastructure of atypical ductal hyperplasia, intraductal carcinoma, and infiltrating ductal carcinoma of the breast. Cancer 1969;24:1152-1169.
5. 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.
6. Dupont WD, Page DL. Risk factors for breast cancer in women with proliferative breast disease. N Engl J Med 1985;312:146-151. (Pubitemid 15192861)
7. Beck JS. Observer variability in reporting of breast lesions. J Clin Pathol 1985;38:1358-1365.
8. 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.
9. Rosai J. Borderline epithelial lesions of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol 1991;15:209-221.
10. Schnitt SJ, Connolly JL, Tavassoli FA, et al. Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of ductal proliferative breast lesions using standardized criteria. Am J Surg Pathol 1992;16:1133-1143. (Pubitemid 23004420)
11. Wells WA, Carney PA, Eliassen MS, et al. Statewide study of diagnostic agreement in breast pathology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:142-145. (Pubitemid 28114415)
12. Simpson JF. Update on atypical epithelial hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ. Pathology 2009;41: 36-39.
13. Pinder SE, Ellis IO. The diagnosis and management of pre-invasive breast disease: ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH)-current definitions and classification. Breast Cancer Res 2003;5:254-257. (Pubitemid 37080855)
14. Fleiss JL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions Vol., John Wiley and Sons: New York, 1981.
15. Carpenter CR. Kappa statistic. CMAJ 2005;173: 15-16; author reply 7.
16. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, et al. Atypical hyperplastic lesions of the female breast. A long-term follow-up study. Cancer 1985;55:2698-2708.
17. Tavassoli FA, Norris HJ. A comparison of the results of long-term follow-up for atypical intraductal hyperplasia and intraductal hyperplasia of the breast. Cancer 1990;65:518-529. (Pubitemid 20058370)
18. Bodian CA, Perzin KH, Lattes R, et al. Reproducibility and validity of pathologic classifications of benign breast disease and implications for clinical applications. Cancer 1993;71:3908-3913. (Pubitemid 23172968)
19. Ghofrani M, Tapia B, Tavassoli FA. Discrepancies in the diagnosis of intraductal proliferative lesions of the breast and its management implications: results of a multinational survey. Virchows Arch 2006;449: 609-616. (Pubitemid 44832630)
20. Palazzo JP, Hyslop T. Hyperplastic ductal and lobular lesions and carcinomas in situ of the breast: reproducibility of current diagnostic criteria among community-and academic-based pathologists. Breast J 1998; 4:230-237. (Pubitemid 28367187)
21. Elston CW, Sloane JP, Amendoeira I, et al. Causes of inconsistency in diagnosing and classifying intraductal proliferations of the breast. European commission working group on breast screening pathology. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:1769-1772. (Pubitemid 30639496)
22. Bianchi S, Palli D, Galli M, et al. Reproducibility of histological diagnoses and diagnostic accuracy of non palpable breast lesions. Pathol Res Pract 1994; 190:69-76. (Pubitemid 24106588)
23. MacGrogan G, Arnould L, de Mascarel I, et al. Impact of immunohistochemical markers, CK5/6 and E-cadherin on diagnostic agreement in non-invasive proliferative breast lesions. Histopathology 2008;52: 689-697. (Pubitemid 351600053)
24. Yeh IT, Mies C. Application of immunohistochemistry to breast lesions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2008;132: 349-358. (Pubitemid 351328810)
25. Otterbach F, Bankfalvi A, Bergner S, et al. Cytokeratin 5/6 immunohistochemistry assists the differential diagnosis of atypical proliferations of the breast. Histopathology 2000;37:232-240.
26. Heatley M, Maxwell P, Whiteside C, et al. Cytokeratin intermediate filament expression in benign and malignant breast disease. J Clin Pathol 1995;48:26-32.
27. Purkis PE, Steel JB, Mackenzie IC, et al. Antibody markers of basal cells in complex epithelia. J Cell Sci 1990;97(Part 1):39-50. (Pubitemid 120023244)
28. Wetzels RH, Holland R, van Haelst UJ, et al. Detection of basement membrane components and basal cell keratin 14 in noninvasive and invasive carcinomas of the breast. Am J Pathol 1989;134:571-579. (Pubitemid 19082851)
29. Lacroix-Triki M, Mery E, Voigt JJ, et al. Value of cytokeratin 5/6 immunostaining using D5/16 B4 antibody in the spectrum of proliferative intraepithelial lesions of the breast. A comparative study with 34betaE12 antibody. Virchows Arch 2003;442: 548-554. (Pubitemid 36819248)
30. Moinfar F, Man YG, Lininger RA, et al. Use of keratin 35betaE12 as an adjunct in the diagnosis of mammary intraepithelial neoplasia-ductal type-benign and malignant intraductal proliferations. Am J Surg Pathol 1999;23:1048-1058. (Pubitemid 29409766)
31. Douglas-Jones A, Shah V, Morgan J, et al. Observer variability in the histopathological reporting of core biopsies of papillary breast lesions is reduced by the use of immunohistochemistry for CK5/6, calponin and p63. Histopathology 2005;47:202-208. (Pubitemid 41113124)
32. Gal-Gombos EC, Esserman LE, Recine MA, et al. Large-needle core biopsy in atypical intraductal epithelial hyperplasia including immunohistochemical expression of high molecular weight cytokeratin: analysis of results of a single institution. Breast J 2002; 8:269-274. (Pubitemid 35025854)
33. Beahrs OH, Shapiro S, Smart C. Report of the working group to review the National Cancer Institute-American Cancer Society breast cancer detection demonstartion projects. J Natl Cancer Inst 1979;62: 640-709.
34. Beahrs OH, Smart CR. Diagnosis of minimal breast cancers in the BCDDP: the 66 questionable cases. Cancer 1979;43:848-850. (Pubitemid 9163610)
35. Beahrs OH. Early detection of breast cancer: results of a screening programme. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1980;62: 38-40. (Pubitemid 10132769)
36. Smart CR, Byrne C, Smith RA, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of the breast cancers diagnosed during the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project. CA Cancer J Clin 1997;47:134-149. (Pubitemid 27226280)
37. Fisher ER, Costantino J. Quality assurance of pathology in clinical trials. The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project experience. Cancer 1994;74: 2638-2641.
38. Dundar MM, Badve S, Jain R, et al. Computerized analysis of breast microscopic tissues for improved classification of intraductal lesions. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 4 February 2011 [e-pub ahead of print].