TY - JOUR
T1 - Significant inter-and intralaboratory variation in gleason grading of prostate cancer
T2 - A nationwide study of 35,258 patients in the Netherlands
AU - Flach, Rachel N.
AU - Willemse, Peter Paul M.
AU - Suelmann, Britt B.M.
AU - Deckers, Ivette A.G.
AU - Jonges, Trudy N.
AU - van Dooijeweert, Carmen
AU - van Diest, Paul J.
AU - Meijer, Richard P.
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding: This research was funded by Quality Foundation of the Dutch Association of Medical Specialists (SKMS), Astellas Pharma BV and Pfizer BV.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2021/11/1
Y1 - 2021/11/1
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Gleason grading
KW - Interlaboratory variation
KW - Pathology
KW - Prostate cancer
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85117961016&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/cancers13215378
DO - 10.3390/cancers13215378
M3 - Article
C2 - 34771542
AN - SCOPUS:85117961016
SN - 2072-6694
VL - 13
SP - 1
EP - 12
JO - Cancers
JF - Cancers
IS - 21
M1 - 5378
ER -