Cargando…

Grading variation in 2,934 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the effect of laboratory- and pathologist-specific feedback reports

BACKGROUND: Histologic grade of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS) may become the single biomarker that decides whether patients will be treated. Yet, evidence shows that grading variation in daily practice is substantial. To facilitate quality improvement, feedback reports, in which labo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Dooijeweert, Carmen, van Diest, Paul J., Baas, Inge O., van der Wall, Elsken, Deckers, Ivette A. G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7216330/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32393303
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13000-020-00970-8
_version_ 1783532392382726144
author van Dooijeweert, Carmen
van Diest, Paul J.
Baas, Inge O.
van der Wall, Elsken
Deckers, Ivette A. G.
author_facet van Dooijeweert, Carmen
van Diest, Paul J.
Baas, Inge O.
van der Wall, Elsken
Deckers, Ivette A. G.
author_sort van Dooijeweert, Carmen
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Histologic grade of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS) may become the single biomarker that decides whether patients will be treated. Yet, evidence shows that grading variation in daily practice is substantial. To facilitate quality improvement, feedback reports, in which laboratory-specific case-mix adjusted proportions per grade were benchmarked against other laboratories, were sent to the individual laboratories by March 1, 2018. One year later, the effect of these feedback reports on inter-laboratory variation was studied. METHODS: Synoptic pathology reports of all pure DCIS resection specimens between March 1, 2017 and March 1, 2019 were retrieved from PALGA (the nationwide Dutch pathology registry). Laboratory-specific proportions per grade were compared to the overall proportion in the year before and after feedback. The absolute deviation for all three grades at once, represented by the overall deviation score (ODS), was calculated as the sum of deviations from the grade-specific overall proportions. Case-mix adjusted, laboratory-specific odds ratios (ORs) for high- (grade III) versus low-grade (grade I-II) DCIS were obtained by multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 2954 DCIS reports from 31 laboratories were included. After feedback, the range between laboratories decreased by 22 and 6.5% for grades II and III, while an increase of 6.2% was observed for grade I. Both the mean ODS (27.2 to 24.1%) and maximum ODS (87.7 to 59.6%) decreased considerably. However, the range of case-mix adjusted ORs remained fairly stable and substantial (0.39 (95% CI: 0.18–0.86) to 3.69 (95% CI: 1.30–10.51)). CONCLUSION: A promising decrease in grading variation was observed after laboratory-specific feedback for DCIS grades II-III, while this was not observed for DCIS grade I. Overall, grading variation remained substantial which needs to be addressed considering its clinical implications. Nationwide consensus on a classification, and training of (expert breast) pathologists, for example by e-learning, may help to further improve grading standardization.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7216330
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72163302020-05-18 Grading variation in 2,934 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the effect of laboratory- and pathologist-specific feedback reports van Dooijeweert, Carmen van Diest, Paul J. Baas, Inge O. van der Wall, Elsken Deckers, Ivette A. G. Diagn Pathol Research BACKGROUND: Histologic grade of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS) may become the single biomarker that decides whether patients will be treated. Yet, evidence shows that grading variation in daily practice is substantial. To facilitate quality improvement, feedback reports, in which laboratory-specific case-mix adjusted proportions per grade were benchmarked against other laboratories, were sent to the individual laboratories by March 1, 2018. One year later, the effect of these feedback reports on inter-laboratory variation was studied. METHODS: Synoptic pathology reports of all pure DCIS resection specimens between March 1, 2017 and March 1, 2019 were retrieved from PALGA (the nationwide Dutch pathology registry). Laboratory-specific proportions per grade were compared to the overall proportion in the year before and after feedback. The absolute deviation for all three grades at once, represented by the overall deviation score (ODS), was calculated as the sum of deviations from the grade-specific overall proportions. Case-mix adjusted, laboratory-specific odds ratios (ORs) for high- (grade III) versus low-grade (grade I-II) DCIS were obtained by multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 2954 DCIS reports from 31 laboratories were included. After feedback, the range between laboratories decreased by 22 and 6.5% for grades II and III, while an increase of 6.2% was observed for grade I. Both the mean ODS (27.2 to 24.1%) and maximum ODS (87.7 to 59.6%) decreased considerably. However, the range of case-mix adjusted ORs remained fairly stable and substantial (0.39 (95% CI: 0.18–0.86) to 3.69 (95% CI: 1.30–10.51)). CONCLUSION: A promising decrease in grading variation was observed after laboratory-specific feedback for DCIS grades II-III, while this was not observed for DCIS grade I. Overall, grading variation remained substantial which needs to be addressed considering its clinical implications. Nationwide consensus on a classification, and training of (expert breast) pathologists, for example by e-learning, may help to further improve grading standardization. BioMed Central 2020-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7216330/ /pubmed/32393303 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13000-020-00970-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
van Dooijeweert, Carmen
van Diest, Paul J.
Baas, Inge O.
van der Wall, Elsken
Deckers, Ivette A. G.
Grading variation in 2,934 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the effect of laboratory- and pathologist-specific feedback reports
title Grading variation in 2,934 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the effect of laboratory- and pathologist-specific feedback reports
title_full Grading variation in 2,934 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the effect of laboratory- and pathologist-specific feedback reports
title_fullStr Grading variation in 2,934 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the effect of laboratory- and pathologist-specific feedback reports
title_full_unstemmed Grading variation in 2,934 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the effect of laboratory- and pathologist-specific feedback reports
title_short Grading variation in 2,934 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the effect of laboratory- and pathologist-specific feedback reports
title_sort grading variation in 2,934 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the effect of laboratory- and pathologist-specific feedback reports
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7216330/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32393303
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13000-020-00970-8
work_keys_str_mv AT vandooijeweertcarmen gradingvariationin2934patientswithductalcarcinomainsituofthebreasttheeffectoflaboratoryandpathologistspecificfeedbackreports
AT vandiestpaulj gradingvariationin2934patientswithductalcarcinomainsituofthebreasttheeffectoflaboratoryandpathologistspecificfeedbackreports
AT baasingeo gradingvariationin2934patientswithductalcarcinomainsituofthebreasttheeffectoflaboratoryandpathologistspecificfeedbackreports
AT vanderwallelsken gradingvariationin2934patientswithductalcarcinomainsituofthebreasttheeffectoflaboratoryandpathologistspecificfeedbackreports
AT deckersivetteag gradingvariationin2934patientswithductalcarcinomainsituofthebreasttheeffectoflaboratoryandpathologistspecificfeedbackreports