ERJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online before print August 9, 2006
Eur Respir J 2006, doi:10.1183/09031936.06.00043506
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
28/6/1186    most recent
09031936.06.00043506v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Permissions
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Thunnissen, F.B.
Right arrow Articles by Flieder, D.B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Thunnissen, F.B.
Right arrow Articles by Flieder, D.B.


ORIGINAL ARTICLE

EU-US pathology panel for uniform diagnosis in randomised controlled trials for CT screening of lung cancer

F.B. Thunnissen 1*, K.M. Kerr 2, E. Brambilla 3, C.E. Comin 4, W.A. Franklin 5, B. Guldhammer 6, W.H. Westra 7, D.B. Flieder 8

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

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: e.thunnissen{at}cwz.nl.


   Abstract

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

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

The readings of the first series showed a moderate agreement kappa score: mean and standard deviation for "8"(all 8 categories) and "2" categories was 0.53±0.05 and 0.65±0.04, respectively. The kappa "2" score distinguished between categories denoting benign and malignant lesions. The second series resulted in a good agreement kappa score: mean and standard deviation for "8" and "2" categories was 0.65±0.06 and 0.81±0.02.

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

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







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2006 by the European Respiratory Society.