Cargando…
Whole Slide Imaging Versus Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Multicenter Blinded Randomized Noninferiority Study of 1992 Cases (Pivotal Study)
Most prior studies of primary diagnosis in surgical pathology using whole slide imaging (WSI) versus microscopy have focused on specific organ systems or included relatively few cases. The objective of this study was to demonstrate that WSI is noninferior to microscopy for primary diagnosis in surgi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5737464/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28961557 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000948 |
_version_ | 1783287522332246016 |
---|---|
author | Mukhopadhyay, Sanjay Feldman, Michael D. Abels, Esther Ashfaq, Raheela Beltaifa, Senda Cacciabeve, Nicolas G. Cathro, Helen P. Cheng, Liang Cooper, Kumarasen Dickey, Glenn E. Gill, Ryan M. Heaton, Robert P. Kerstens, René Lindberg, Guy M. Malhotra, Reenu K. Mandell, James W. Manlucu, Ellen D. Mills, Anne M. Mills, Stacey E. Moskaluk, Christopher A. Nelis, Mischa Patil, Deepa T. Przybycin, Christopher G. Reynolds, Jordan P. Rubin, Brian P. Saboorian, Mohammad H. Salicru, Mauricio Samols, Mark A. Sturgis, Charles D. Turner, Kevin O. Wick, Mark R. Yoon, Ji Y. Zhao, Po Taylor, Clive R. |
author_facet | Mukhopadhyay, Sanjay Feldman, Michael D. Abels, Esther Ashfaq, Raheela Beltaifa, Senda Cacciabeve, Nicolas G. Cathro, Helen P. Cheng, Liang Cooper, Kumarasen Dickey, Glenn E. Gill, Ryan M. Heaton, Robert P. Kerstens, René Lindberg, Guy M. Malhotra, Reenu K. Mandell, James W. Manlucu, Ellen D. Mills, Anne M. Mills, Stacey E. Moskaluk, Christopher A. Nelis, Mischa Patil, Deepa T. Przybycin, Christopher G. Reynolds, Jordan P. Rubin, Brian P. Saboorian, Mohammad H. Salicru, Mauricio Samols, Mark A. Sturgis, Charles D. Turner, Kevin O. Wick, Mark R. Yoon, Ji Y. Zhao, Po Taylor, Clive R. |
author_sort | Mukhopadhyay, Sanjay |
collection | PubMed |
description | Most prior studies of primary diagnosis in surgical pathology using whole slide imaging (WSI) versus microscopy have focused on specific organ systems or included relatively few cases. The objective of this study was to demonstrate that WSI is noninferior to microscopy for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology. A blinded randomized noninferiority study was conducted across the entire range of surgical pathology cases (biopsies and resections, including hematoxylin and eosin, immunohistochemistry, and special stains) from 4 institutions using the original sign-out diagnosis (baseline diagnosis) as the reference standard. Cases were scanned, converted to WSI and randomized. Sixteen pathologists interpreted cases by microscopy or WSI, followed by a wash-out period of ≥4 weeks, after which cases were read by the same observers using the other modality. Major discordances were identified by an adjudication panel, and the differences between major discordance rates for both microscopy (against the reference standard) and WSI (against the reference standard) were calculated. A total of 1992 cases were included, resulting in 15,925 reads. The major discordance rate with the reference standard diagnosis was 4.9% for WSI and 4.6% for microscopy. The difference between major discordance rates for microscopy and WSI was 0.4% (95% confidence interval, −0.30% to 1.01%). The difference in major discordance rates for WSI and microscopy was highest in endocrine pathology (1.8%), neoplastic kidney pathology (1.5%), urinary bladder pathology (1.3%), and gynecologic pathology (1.2%). Detailed analysis of these cases revealed no instances where interpretation by WSI was consistently inaccurate compared with microscopy for multiple observers. We conclude that WSI is noninferior to microscopy for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology, including biopsies and resections stained with hematoxylin and eosin, immunohistochemistry and special stains. This conclusion is valid across a wide variety of organ systems and specimen types. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5737464 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57374642018-01-12 Whole Slide Imaging Versus Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Multicenter Blinded Randomized Noninferiority Study of 1992 Cases (Pivotal Study) Mukhopadhyay, Sanjay Feldman, Michael D. Abels, Esther Ashfaq, Raheela Beltaifa, Senda Cacciabeve, Nicolas G. Cathro, Helen P. Cheng, Liang Cooper, Kumarasen Dickey, Glenn E. Gill, Ryan M. Heaton, Robert P. Kerstens, René Lindberg, Guy M. Malhotra, Reenu K. Mandell, James W. Manlucu, Ellen D. Mills, Anne M. Mills, Stacey E. Moskaluk, Christopher A. Nelis, Mischa Patil, Deepa T. Przybycin, Christopher G. Reynolds, Jordan P. Rubin, Brian P. Saboorian, Mohammad H. Salicru, Mauricio Samols, Mark A. Sturgis, Charles D. Turner, Kevin O. Wick, Mark R. Yoon, Ji Y. Zhao, Po Taylor, Clive R. Am J Surg Pathol Original Articles Most prior studies of primary diagnosis in surgical pathology using whole slide imaging (WSI) versus microscopy have focused on specific organ systems or included relatively few cases. The objective of this study was to demonstrate that WSI is noninferior to microscopy for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology. A blinded randomized noninferiority study was conducted across the entire range of surgical pathology cases (biopsies and resections, including hematoxylin and eosin, immunohistochemistry, and special stains) from 4 institutions using the original sign-out diagnosis (baseline diagnosis) as the reference standard. Cases were scanned, converted to WSI and randomized. Sixteen pathologists interpreted cases by microscopy or WSI, followed by a wash-out period of ≥4 weeks, after which cases were read by the same observers using the other modality. Major discordances were identified by an adjudication panel, and the differences between major discordance rates for both microscopy (against the reference standard) and WSI (against the reference standard) were calculated. A total of 1992 cases were included, resulting in 15,925 reads. The major discordance rate with the reference standard diagnosis was 4.9% for WSI and 4.6% for microscopy. The difference between major discordance rates for microscopy and WSI was 0.4% (95% confidence interval, −0.30% to 1.01%). The difference in major discordance rates for WSI and microscopy was highest in endocrine pathology (1.8%), neoplastic kidney pathology (1.5%), urinary bladder pathology (1.3%), and gynecologic pathology (1.2%). Detailed analysis of these cases revealed no instances where interpretation by WSI was consistently inaccurate compared with microscopy for multiple observers. We conclude that WSI is noninferior to microscopy for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology, including biopsies and resections stained with hematoxylin and eosin, immunohistochemistry and special stains. This conclusion is valid across a wide variety of organ systems and specimen types. Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc 2018-01 2017-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5737464/ /pubmed/28961557 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000948 Text en Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Mukhopadhyay, Sanjay Feldman, Michael D. Abels, Esther Ashfaq, Raheela Beltaifa, Senda Cacciabeve, Nicolas G. Cathro, Helen P. Cheng, Liang Cooper, Kumarasen Dickey, Glenn E. Gill, Ryan M. Heaton, Robert P. Kerstens, René Lindberg, Guy M. Malhotra, Reenu K. Mandell, James W. Manlucu, Ellen D. Mills, Anne M. Mills, Stacey E. Moskaluk, Christopher A. Nelis, Mischa Patil, Deepa T. Przybycin, Christopher G. Reynolds, Jordan P. Rubin, Brian P. Saboorian, Mohammad H. Salicru, Mauricio Samols, Mark A. Sturgis, Charles D. Turner, Kevin O. Wick, Mark R. Yoon, Ji Y. Zhao, Po Taylor, Clive R. Whole Slide Imaging Versus Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Multicenter Blinded Randomized Noninferiority Study of 1992 Cases (Pivotal Study) |
title | Whole Slide Imaging Versus Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Multicenter Blinded Randomized Noninferiority Study of 1992 Cases (Pivotal Study) |
title_full | Whole Slide Imaging Versus Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Multicenter Blinded Randomized Noninferiority Study of 1992 Cases (Pivotal Study) |
title_fullStr | Whole Slide Imaging Versus Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Multicenter Blinded Randomized Noninferiority Study of 1992 Cases (Pivotal Study) |
title_full_unstemmed | Whole Slide Imaging Versus Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Multicenter Blinded Randomized Noninferiority Study of 1992 Cases (Pivotal Study) |
title_short | Whole Slide Imaging Versus Microscopy for Primary Diagnosis in Surgical Pathology: A Multicenter Blinded Randomized Noninferiority Study of 1992 Cases (Pivotal Study) |
title_sort | whole slide imaging versus microscopy for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology: a multicenter blinded randomized noninferiority study of 1992 cases (pivotal study) |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5737464/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28961557 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000948 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mukhopadhyaysanjay wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT feldmanmichaeld wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT abelsesther wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT ashfaqraheela wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT beltaifasenda wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT cacciabevenicolasg wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT cathrohelenp wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT chengliang wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT cooperkumarasen wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT dickeyglenne wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT gillryanm wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT heatonrobertp wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT kerstensrene wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT lindbergguym wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT malhotrareenuk wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT mandelljamesw wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT manlucuellend wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT millsannem wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT millsstaceye wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT moskalukchristophera wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT nelismischa wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT patildeepat wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT przybycinchristopherg wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT reynoldsjordanp wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT rubinbrianp wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT saboorianmohammadh wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT salicrumauricio wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT samolsmarka wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT sturgischarlesd wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT turnerkevino wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT wickmarkr wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT yoonjiy wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT zhaopo wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy AT taylorcliver wholeslideimagingversusmicroscopyforprimarydiagnosisinsurgicalpathologyamulticenterblindedrandomizednoninferioritystudyof1992casespivotalstudy |