Correction: Pathologists' diagnosis of invasive melanoma and melanocytic proliferations: Observer accuracy and reproducibility study (BMJ (Online) (2017) 357 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.j2813);Pathologists' diagnosis of invasive melanoma and melanocytic proliferations: Observer accuracy and reproducibility study

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 357, Issue , 2017, Pages

  Elmore, Joann G ^a   Barnhill, Raymond L ^b   Elder, David E ^c   Longton, Gary M ^d   Pepe, Margaret S ^d   Reisch, Lisa M ^a   Carney, Patricia A ^e   Titus, Linda J ^f   Nelson, Heidi D ^e,g   Onega, Tracy ^f,h   Tosteson, Anna N A ^f   Weinstock, Martin A ^i,j   Knezevich, Stevan R ^k   Piepkorn, Michael W ^a,l  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b INSTITUT CURIE   (France)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^d Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

^e OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^f NORRIS COTTON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^g Providence Cancer Center   (United States)

^h DARTMOUTH MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

ⁱ VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^j BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^k Pathology Associates   (United States)

^l Dermatopathology Northwest   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DYSPLASTIC NEVUS; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; MELANOCYTOSIS; MELANOMA; PATHOLOGIST; PIGMENTED NEVUS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; SELF REPORT; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SKIN BIOPSY; TUMOR DIAGNOSIS; TUMOR INVASION; UNITED STATES; BIOPSY; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; NEVUS, PIGMENTED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; SKIN NEOPLASMS; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ADULT; BIOPSY; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; HUMANS; MELANOMA; MIDDLE AGED; NEVUS, PIGMENTED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY, CLINICAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SKIN NEOPLASMS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 85021663116     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.j3798     Document Type: Erratum

References (56)

1. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Medicine. Improving Diagnosis in Health Care.The National Academies Press, 2015.
2. Feinstein AR. Boolean Algebra and Clinical Taxonomy. N Engl J Med 1963;269:929-38. doi:10.1056/NEJM196310312691801.
3. Ransohoff DF, Feinstein AR. Problems of spectrum and bias in evaluating the efficacy of diagnostic tests. N Engl J Med 1978;299:926-30. doi:10.1056/NEJM197810262991705.
4. Welch HG, Woloshin S, Schwartz LM. Skin biopsy rates and incidence of melanoma: Population based ecological study. BMJ 2005;331:481. doi:10.1136/bmj.38516.649537.E0.
5. Gerami P, Busam K, Cochran A, et al. Histomorphologic assessment and interobserver diagnostic reproducibility of atypical spitzoid melanocytic neoplasms with long-term follow-up. Am J Surg Pathol 2014;38:934-40. doi:10.1097/PAS.0000000000000198.
6. Duncan LM, Berwick M, Bruijn JA, Byers HR, Mihm MC, Barnhill RL. Histopathologic recognition and grading of dysplastic melanocytic nevi: An interobserver agreement study. J Invest Dermatol 1993;100:318S-21S. doi:10.1038/jid.1993.55.
7. Duray PH, DerSimonian R, Barnhill R, et al. An analysis of interobserver recognition of the histopathologic features of dysplastic nevi from a mixed group of nevomelanocytic lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol 1992;27:741-9. doi:10.1016/0190-9622(92)70248-E.
8. Corona R, Mele A, Amini M, et al. Interobserver variability on the histopathologic diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma and other pigmented skin lesions. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:1218-23. doi:10.1200/JCO.1996.14.4.1218.
9. Swerlick RA, Chen S. The melanoma epidemic. Is increased surveillance the solution or the problemArch Dermatol 1996;132:881-4. doi:10.1001/archderm.1996.03890320029004.
10. Onega T, Reisch LM, Frederick PD, et al. Use of Digital Whole Slide Imaging in Dermatopathology. J Digit Imaging 2016;29:243-53. doi:10.1007/s10278-015-9836-y.
11. Knezevich SR, Barnhill RL, Elder DE, et al. Variability in mitotic figures in serial sections of thin melanomas. J Am Acad Dermatol 2014;71:1204-11. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2014.07.056.
12. Carney PA, Frederick PD, Reisch LM, et al. How concerns and experiences with medical malpractice affect dermatopathologists' perceptions of their diagnostic practices when interpreting cutaneous melanocytic lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol 2016;74:317-24, quiz 324.e1-8.
13. Piepkorn MW, Barnhill RL, Elder DE, et al. The MPATH-Dx reporting schema for melanocytic proliferations and melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol 2014;70:131-41. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2013.07.027.
14. Carney PA, Reisch LM, Piepkorn MW, et al. Achieving consensus for the histopathologic diagnosis of melanocytic lesions: Use of the modified Delphi method. J Cutan Pathol 2016;43:830-7. doi:10.1111/cup.12751.
15. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A, eds. AJCC cancer staging manual (7th ed). Springer; 2010.
16. Lott JP, Elmore JG, Zhao GA, et al. International Melanoma Pathology Study Group. Evaluation of the Melanocytic Pathology Assessment Tool and Hierarchy for Diagnosis (MPATH-Dx) classification scheme for diagnosis of cutaneous melanocytic neoplasms: Results from the International Melanoma Pathology Study Group. J Am Acad Dermatol 2016;75:356-63. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2016.04.052.
17. Dalkey NC, Brown B, Cochran N. The Delphi Method, III. Use of Self Ratings to Improve Group Estimates.Rand Corp, 1969.
18. American Medical Association. Physicians. Secondary Physicians 2011. http://www.dmddata.com/data-lists-physicians.asp.
19. Elmore JG, Nelson HD, Pepe MS, et al. Variability in Pathologists' Interpretations of Individual Breast Biopsy Slides: A Population Perspective. Ann Intern Med 2016;164:649-55. doi:10.7326/M15-0964.
20. Feinstein AR. A bibliography of publications on observer variability. J Chronic Dis 1985;38:619-32. doi:10.1016/0021-9681(85)90016-5.
21. Elmore JG, Feinstein AR. A bibliography of publications on observer variability (final installment). J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:567-80. doi:10.1016/0895-4356(92)90128-A.
22. Elmore JG, Longton GM, Carney PA, et al. Diagnostic concordance among pathologists interpreting breast biopsy specimens. JAMA 2015;313:1122-32. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.1405.
23. Elmore JG, Wells CK, Lee CH, Howard DH, Feinstein AR. Variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms. N Engl J Med 1994;331:1493-9. doi:10.1056/NEJM199412013312206.
24. Carli P, De Giorgi V, Naldi L, Dosi G. Dermoscopy Panel. Reliability and inter-observer agreement of dermoscopic diagnosis of melanoma and melanocytic naevi. Eur J Cancer Prev 1998;7:397-402. doi:10.1097/00008469-199810000-00005.
25. Krieger N, Hiatt RA, Sagebiel RW, Clark WH Jr, Mihm MC Jr. Inter-observer variability among pathologists' evaluation of malignant melanoma: Effects upon an analytic study. J Clin Epidemiol 1994;47:897-902. doi:10.1016/0895-4356(94)90193-7.
26. CRC Melanoma Pathology Panel. A nationwide survey of observer variation in the diagnosis of thin cutaneous malignant melanoma including the MIN terminology. J Clin Pathol 1997;50:202-5. doi:10.1136/jcp.50.3.202.
27. Heenan PJ, Matz LR, Blackwell JB, et al. Inter-observer variation between pathologists in the classification of cutaneous malignant melanoma in western Australia. Histopathology 1984;8:717-29. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2559.1984.tb02388.x.
28. Murali R, Hughes MT, Fitzgerald P, Thompson JF, Scolyer RA. Interobserver variation in the histopathologic reporting of key prognostic parameters, particularly clark level, affects pathologic staging of primary cutaneous melanoma. Ann Surg 2009;249:641-7. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e31819ed973.
29. Shoo BA, Sagebiel RW, Kashani-Sabet M. Discordance in the histopathologic diagnosis of melanoma at a melanoma referral center. J Am Acad Dermatol 2010;62:751-6. doi:10.1016/j. jaad.2009.09.043.
30. Braun RP, Gutkowicz-Krusin D, Rabinovitz H, et al. Agreement of dermatopathologists in the evaluation of clinically difficult melanocytic lesions: How golden is the 'gold standard'Dermatology 2012;224:51-8. doi:10.1159/000336886.
31. Gaudi S, Zarandona JM, Raab SS, English JC 3rd, Jukic DM. Discrepancies in dermatopathology diagnoses: The role of second review policies and dermatopathology fellowship training. J Am Acad Dermatol 2013;68:119-28. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2012.06.034.
32. Patrawala S, Maley A, Greskovich C, et al. Discordance of histopathologic parameters in cutaneous melanoma: Clinical implications. J Am Acad Dermatol 2016;74:75-80. doi:10.1016/j. jaad.2015.09.008.
33. Niebling MG, Haydu LE, Karim RZ, Thompson JF, Scolyer RA. Pathology review significantly affects diagnosis and treatment of melanoma patients: An analysis of 5011 patients treated at a melanoma treatment center. Ann Surg Oncol 2014;21:2245-51. doi:10.1245/s10434-014-3682-x.
34. Farmer ER, Gonin R, Hanna MP. Discordance in the histopathologic diagnosis of melanoma and melanocytic nevi between expert pathologists. Hum Pathol 1996;27:528-31. doi:10.1016/S0046-8177(96)90157-4.
35. Barnhill RL, Argenyi ZB, From L, et al. Atypical Spitz nevi/tumors: Lack of consensus for diagnosis, discrimination from melanoma, prediction of outcome. Hum Pathol 1999;30:513-20. doi:10.1016/S0046-8177(99)90193-4.
36. Meyer LJ, Piepkorn M, Goldgar DE, et al. Interobserver concordance in discriminating clinical atypia of melanocytic nevi, correlations with histologic atypia. J Am Acad Dermatol 1996;34:618-25. doi:10.1016/S0190-9622(96)80061-2.
37. Ferrara G, Argenziano G, Soyer HP, et al. Dermoscopic and histopathologic diagnosis of equivocal melanocytic skin lesions: An interdisciplinary study on 107 cases. Cancer 2002;95:1094-100. doi:10.1002/cncr.10768.
38. Colloby PS, West KP, Fletcher A. Observer variation in the measurement of Breslow depth and Clark's level in thin cutaneous malignant melanoma. J Pathol 1991;163:245-50. doi:10.1002/path.1711630310.
39. Cook MG, Clarke TJ, Humphreys S, et al. The evaluation of diagnostic and prognostic criteria and the terminology of thin cutaneous malignant melanoma by the CRC Melanoma Pathology Panel. Histopathology 1996;28:497-512. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2559.1996. d01-464.x.
40. Lock-Andersen J, Hou-Jensen K, Hansen JP, Jensen NK, Søgaard H, Andersen PK. Observer variation in histological classification of cutaneous malignant melanoma. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 1995;29:141-8. doi:10.3109/02844319509034330.
41. Spatz A, Cook MG, Elder DE, Piepkorn M, Ruiter DJ, Barnhill RL. Interobserver reproducibility of ulceration assessment in primary cutaneous melanomas. Eur J Cancer 2003;39:1861-5. doi:10.1016/S0959-8049(03)00325-3.
42. Wechsler J, Bastuji-Garin S, Spatz A, et al. French Cutaneous Cancerology Group. Reliability of the histopathologic diagnosis of malignant melanoma in childhood. Arch Dermatol 2002;138:625-8. doi:10.1001/archderm.138.5.625.
43. Eriksson H, Frohm-Nilsson M, Hedblad MA, et al. Interobserver variability of histopathological prognostic parameters in cutaneous malignant melanoma: Impact on patient management. Acta Derm Venereol 2013;93:411-6. doi:10.2340/00015555-1517.
44. Scolyer RA, Shaw HM, Thompson JF, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of histopathologic prognostic variables in primary cutaneous melanomas. Am J Surg Pathol 2003;27:1571-6. doi:10.1097/00000478-200312000-00011.
45. Brochez L, Verhaeghe E, Grosshans E, et al. Inter-observer variation in the histopathological diagnosis of clinically suspicious pigmented skin lesions. J Pathol 2002;196:459-66. doi:10.1002/path.1061.
46. Boiko PE, Piepkorn MW. Reliability of skin biopsy pathology. J Am Board Fam Pract 1994;7:371-4.
47. Piepkorn MW, Barnhill RL, Cannon-Albright LA, et al. A multiobserver, population-based analysis of histologic dysplasia in melanocytic nevi. J Am Acad Dermatol 1994;30:707-14. doi:10.1016/S0190-9622(08)81499-5.
48. Weinstock MA, Barnhill RL, Rhodes AR, Brodsky GL. The Dysplastic Nevus Panel. Reliability of the histopathologic diagnosis of melanocytic dysplasia. Arch Dermatol 1997;133:953-8. doi:10.1001/archderm.1997.03890440019002.
49. Lott JP, Piepkorn MW, Elmore JG. Dermatology in an age of fully transparent electronic medical records. JAMA Dermatol 2015;151:477-8. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2014.4362.
50. Delbanco T, Walker J, Bell SK, et al. Inviting patients to read their doctors' notes: A quasi-experimental study and a look ahead. Ann Intern Med 2012;157:461-70. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-157-7-201210020-00002.
51. Gordon GH, Joos SK, Byrne J. Physician expressions of uncertainty during patient encounters. Patient Educ Couns 2000;40:59-65. doi:10.1016/S0738-3991(99)00069-5.
52. Galloway M, Taiyeb T. The interpretation of phrases used to describe uncertainty in pathology reports. Patholog Res Int 2011;2011:656079.
53. Attanoos RL, Bull AD, Douglas-Jones AG, Fligelstone LJ, Semararo D. Phraseology in pathology reports. A comparative study of interpretation among pathologists and surgeons. J Clin Pathol 1996;49:79-81. doi:10.1136/jcp.49.1.79.
54. McCullough BJ, Johnson GR, Martin BI, Jarvik JG. Lumbar MR imaging and reporting epidemiology: Do epidemiologic data in reports affect clinical managementRadiology 2012;262:941-6. doi:10.1148/radiol.11110618.
55. Shain AH, Yeh I, Kovalyshyn I, et al. The Genetic Evolution of Melanoma from Precursor Lesions. N Engl J Med 2015;373:1926-36. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1502583.
56. Shain AH, Bastian BC. From melanocytes to melanomas. Nat Rev Cancer 2016;16:345-58. doi:10.1038/nrc.2016.37.