Significant inter-and intralaboratory variation in gleason grading of prostate cancer: A nationwide study of 35,258 patients in the Netherlands

Rachel N. Flach, Peter Paul M. Willemse, Britt B.M. Suelmann, Ivette A.G. Deckers, Trudy N. Jonges, Carmen van Dooijeweert, Paul J. van Diest*, Richard P. Meijer

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

9 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Purpose: Our aim was to analyze grading variation between pathology laboratories and between pathologists within individual laboratories using nationwide real-life data. Methods: We retrieved synoptic (n = 13,397) and narrative (n = 29,377) needle biopsy reports from the Dutch Pathology Registry and prostate-specific antigen values from The Netherlands Cancer Registration for prostate cancer patients diagnosed between January 2017 and December 2019. We determined laboratory-specific proportions per histologic grade and unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) for International Society of Urological Pathologists Grades 1 vs. 2–5 for 40 laboratories due to treatment implications for higher grades. Pathologist-specific proportions were determined for 21 laboratories that consented to this part of analysis. The synoptic reports of 21 laboratories were used for analysis of case-mix correction for PSA, age, year of diagnosis, number of biopsies and positive cores. Results: A total of 38,321 reports of 35,258 patients were included. Grade 1 ranged between 19.7% and 44.3% per laboratory (national mean = 34.1%). Out of 40 laboratories, 22 (55%) reported a significantly deviant OR, ranging from 0.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39–0.59) to 1.54 (CI 1.22–1.93). Case-mix correction was performed for 10,294 reports, altering the status of 3/21 (14%) laboratories, but increasing the observed variation (20.8% vs. 17.7%). Within 15/21 (71%) of laboratories, significant inter-pathologist variation existed. Conclusion: Substantial variation in prostate cancer grading was observed between and within Dutch pathology laboratories. Case-mix correction did not explain the variation. Better standardization of prostate cancer grading is warranted to optimize and harmonize treatment.

Original languageEnglish
Article number5378
Pages (from-to)1-12
JournalCancers
Volume13
Issue number21
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2021

Keywords

  • Gleason grading
  • Interlaboratory variation
  • Pathology
  • Prostate cancer

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Significant inter-and intralaboratory variation in gleason grading of prostate cancer: A nationwide study of 35,258 patients in the Netherlands'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this