HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 28/6/1186    most recent 09031936.06.00043506v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Permissions Request Permissions Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Web of Science (2) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Thunnissen, F. B. Articles by Flieder, D. B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Thunnissen, F. B. Articles by Flieder, D. B.

EU–USA pathology panel for uniform diagnosis in randomised controlled trials for HRCT screening in lung cancer

¹ Dept of Pathology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, ² Dept of Pathology, Aberdeen University School of Medicine, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK, ³ Dept of Pathology, INSERM U578, Grenoble, France, ⁴ Dept of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy, ⁶ Dept of Pathology, KAS Herlev, div. Gentofte, Hellerup, Denmark., ⁵ Dept of Pathology, University of Colorado Health Science Centre, Aurora, CO ⁷ Dept of Pathology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD, and ⁸ Fox Chase Cancer Centre, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

CORRESPONDENCE: F. B. Thunnissen, Dept of Pathology, VU Medical Centre, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Fax: 31 204444586. E-mail: e.thunnissen{at}vumc.nl

Keywords: Diagnosis, lung cancer, panel, pathology, screening

Received: March 29, 2006
Accepted July 31, 2006

Randomised controlled trials for lung cancer screening using high-resolution computed tomography are now underway. In order to allow effective future comparison of the different trials, as well as strengthening conclusions based upon the analysis of larger data sets, uniformity and consistency of pathology diagnosis are essential. The aim of the present study was to determine the effectiveness of the learning process in this difficult area of diagnostic pathology.

Eight pathologists received two CD-ROMs, each with digital images of 30 cases. After diagnosing the first series, selected background reading was provided. Kappa () scores were calculated for each pathologist and category, and were compared to the consensus score.

The readings of the first series showed a moderate agreement score: mean±SD for category numbers 8 (all eight categories) and 2 were 0.53±0.05 and 0.65±0.04, respectively. The 2 score distinguished between categories denoting benign and malignant lesions. The second series resulted in a good agreement score: 0.65±0.06 for category number 8 and 0.81±0.02 for category number 2.

In conclusion, this study demonstrates that screen-detected cases pose particular problems for pathologists and that a trained pathology panel serving randomised controlled trials is likely to lead to more consistent and accurate tissue diagnosis.