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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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.
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