The effect of an e-learning module on grading variation of (pre)malignant breast lesions

The Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL). Oncoline: Breast Cancer Guideline, 2017. https://www.oncoline.nl/borstkanker. Rakha, 2008, Prognostic significance of Nottingham histologic grade in invasive breast carcinoma, J Clin Oncol, 26, 3153, 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.5986 Rakha, 2010, Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade, Breast Cancer Res, 12, 10.1186/bcr2607 van Dooijeweert, 2020, Significant inter- and intra-laboratory variation in grading of invasive breast cancer: a nationwide study of 33,043 patients in the Netherlands, Int J Cancer., 146, 769, 10.1002/ijc.32330 Smith, 2018, Radiation therapy for the whole breast: Executive summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) evidence-based guideline, Pr Radiat Oncol, 8, 145, 10.1016/j.prro.2018.01.012 Elshof, 2015, Feasibility of a prospective, randomised, open-label, international multicentre, phase III, non-inferiority trial to assess the safety of active surveillance for low risk ductal carcinoma in situ—the LORD study, Eur J Cancer, 51, 1497, 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.05.008 Francis, 2015, Addressing overtreatment of screen detected DCIS; the LORIS trial, Eur J Cancer, 51, 2296, 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.07.017 Groen, 2017, Finding the balance between over- and under-treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), Breast, 31, 274, 10.1016/j.breast.2016.09.001 Youngwirth, 2017, Surgery versus monitoring and endocrine therapy for low-risk DCIS: The COMET Trial, Bull Am Coll Surg, 102, 62 van Dooijeweert, 2019, Significant inter- and intra-laboratory variation in grading of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a nationwide study of 4901 patients in the Netherlands, Breast Cancer Res Treat, 174, 479, 10.1007/s10549-018-05082-y van Dooijeweert C, van Diest PJ, Baas IO, van der Wall E, Deckers IA. Variation in breast cancer grading: the effect of creating awareness through laboratory-specific and pathologist-specific feedback reports in 16 734 patients with breast cancer. J Clin Pathol. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2019-206362. Elston, 2002, Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up, Histopathology, 41, 154 Madani, 2019, Decrease of variation in the grading of dysplasia in colorectal adenomas with a national e-learning module, Histopathology, 74, 925, 10.1111/his.13834 IJspeert, 2017, Implementation of an e-learning module improves consistency in the histopathological diagnosis of sessile serrated lesions within a nationwide population screening programme, Histopathology, 70, 929, 10.1111/his.13155 Ruiz, 2006, The impact of E-learning in medical education, Acad Med, 81, 207, 10.1097/00001888-200603000-00002 Holland, 1994, Ductal carcinoma in situ: a proposal for a new classification, Semin Diagn Pathol, 11, 167 Bloom, 1957, Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer; a study of 1409 cases of which 359 have been followed for 15 years, Br J Cancer, 11, 359, 10.1038/bjc.1957.43 Elston, 1991, Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up, Histopathology, 19, 403, 10.1111/j.1365-2559.1991.tb00229.x Harris, 2007, American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer, J Clin Oncol, 25, 5287, 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.2364 Singletary, 2002, Revision of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for breast cancer, J Clin Oncol, 20, 3628, 10.1200/JCO.2002.02.026 Hallgren, 2012, Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: an overview and tutorial, Tutor Quant Methods Psychol, 8, 23, 10.20982/tqmp.08.1.p023 Light, 1971, Measures of response agreement for qualitative data: some generalizations and alternatives, Psychol Bull, 76, 365, 10.1037/h0031643 Cicchetti, 1994, Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology, Psychol Assess, 6, 284, 10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284 R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2018. https://www.R-project.org. Warrens, 2010, Inequalities between multi-rater kappas, Adv Data Anal Classif, 4, 271, 10.1007/s11634-010-0073-4 Berry, 2008, Weighted kappa for multiple raters, Percept Mot Skills, 107, 837, 10.2466/pms.107.3.837-848 Conger, 1980, Integration and generalization of kappas for multiple raters, Psychol Bull, 88, 322, 10.1037/0033-2909.88.2.322 Van Bockstal, 2020, A retrospective alternative for active surveillance trials for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast, Int J Cancer., 146, 1189, 10.1002/ijc.32362 Cserni G, Sejben A. Grading ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast—what's wrong with it? Pathol Oncol Res. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12253-019-00760-8 (Epub ahead of print). Boiesen, 2000, Histologic grading in breast cancer—reproducibility between seven pathologic departments. South Sweden Breast Cancer Group, Acta Oncol, 39, 41, 10.1080/028418600430950 Frierson, 1995, Interobserver reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of the Bloom and Richardson histologic grading scheme for infiltrating ductal carcinoma, Am J Clin Pathol, 103, 195, 10.1093/ajcp/103.2.195 Italian Network for Quality Assurance of Tumour Biomarkers (INQAT), 2005, Quality control for histological grading in breast cancer: an Italian experience, Pathologica, 97, 1 Meyer, 2005, Breast carcinoma malignancy grading by Bloom-Richardson system vs proliferation index: reproducibility of grade and advantages of proliferation index, Mod Pathol, 18, 1067, 10.1038/modpathol.3800388 Nass, 2019, Improving cancer diagnosis and care: patient access to high-quality oncologic pathology, Oncologist, 24, 1287, 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0261