Causes of inconsistency in diagnosing and classifying intraductal proliferations of the breast

European Journal of Cancer - Tập 36 - Trang 1769-1772 - 2000
C.W Elston1, J.P Sloane2, I Amendoeira3, N Apostolikas4, J.P Bellocq5, S Bianchi6, W Boecker7, G Bussolati8, D Coleman9, C.E Connolly10, P Dervan11, M Drijkoningen12, V Eusebi13, D Faverly14, R Holland15, J Jacquemier16, M Lacerda17, J Martinez-Penuela18, C de Miguel19, S Moss9
1Department of Pathology, City Hospital, Nottingham NG5 1PB, UK
2Department of Pathology, University of Liverpool, Duncan Building, Daulby Street, Liverpool, L69 3GA, UK
3Universidade do Porto, Portugal
4Saint Savvas Hospital, Athens, Greece
5Hopital de hautepierre, strasbourg, france
6Azienda Ospedaliera, Florence, Italy
7Universitat Munster, Germany
8Instituto di Anatomia e Istologia Patologica, Turin, Italy
9Cancer Screening Evaluation Unit, Sutton, UK
10University College Hospital Galway, Ireland
11Mater Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
12University Hospital, Leuven, Belgium
13Universita' di Bologna, Italy
14CMP Laboratory, Brussels, Belgium
15Academisch Ziekenhuis, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
16Institut Paoli Calmettes, Marseille, France
17Centro Regional De Oncologia De Coimbra, Portugal
18Hospital de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
19Hospital Virgen del Camino, Spain

Tài liệu tham khảo

Silverstein, 1995, Prognostic classification of breast ductal carcinoma in situ, Lancet, 345, 1154, 10.1016/S0140-6736(95)90982-6 Badve, 1992, A long-term comparative study of the ability of five classifications of ductal carcinoma in situ of breast to predict local recurrence after surgical excision, Hum. Pathol., 29, 915, 10.1016/S0046-8177(98)90196-4 Dupont, 1985, Risk factors for breast cancer in women with proliferative breast disease, N. Engl. J. Med., 312, 146, 10.1056/NEJM198501173120303 Rosai, 1991, Borderline epithelial lesions of the breast, Am. J. Surg. Pathol., 15, 209, 10.1097/00000478-199103000-00001 Douglas-Jones, 1996, A critical appraisal of six modern classifications of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS), Histopathology, 29, 397, 10.1046/j.1365-2559.1996.d01-513.x Sloane, 1994, Consistency of histopathological reporting of breast lesions detected by screening, Eur. J. Cancer, 30A, 1414, 10.1016/0959-8049(94)00261-3 1998, Consistency achieved by 23 European pathologists in categorizing ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast using five classifications, Hum. Pathol., 29, 1056 European Commission. European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Mammography Screening, 2nd edn. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1996, II-C-15–II-C-16. Page, 1992, Combined histologic and cytologic criteria for the diagnosis of mammary atypical hyperplasia, Hum. Pathol., 23, 1095, 10.1016/0046-8177(92)90026-Y Landis, 1977, The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data, Biometrics, 33, 159, 10.2307/2529310 Wells, 1998, Statewide study of diagnostic agreement in breast pathology, J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 90, 142, 10.1093/jnci/90.2.142 Schnitt, 1992, Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of ductal proliferative breast lesions using standardised criteria, Am. J. Surg. Pathol., 16, 1133, 10.1097/00000478-199212000-00001 Sneige, 1999, Interobserver reproducibility of the Lagios nuclear grading system for ductal carcinoma in situ, Hum. Pathol., 30, 257, 10.1016/S0046-8177(99)90002-3 Lakhani, 1995, Atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast, J. Clin. Pathol., 48, 611, 10.1136/jcp.48.7.611 Lakhani, 1999, The transition from hyperplasia to invasive carcinoma of the breast, J. Pathol., 187, 272, 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9896(199902)187:3<272::AID-PATH265>3.0.CO;2-2