About this Journal Submit a Manuscript Table of Contents
Obstetrics and Gynecology International
Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 414086, 6 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/414086
Research Article

Interobserver Agreement for Endometrial Cancer Characteristics Evaluated on Biopsy Material

1Department of Pathology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M4N 3M5
2Division of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada M4N 3M5

Received 13 May 2011; Accepted 17 October 2011

Academic Editor: Sean Blackwell

Copyright © 2012 S. Nofech-Mozes et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, “Corpus cancer staging,” International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, vol. 28, pp. 189–190, 2007.
  2. W. T. Creasman, C. P. Morrow, B. N. Bundy, H. D. Homesley, J. E. Graham, and P. B. Heller, “Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer. A gynecologic oncology group study,” Cancer, vol. 60, no. 8, pp. 2035–2041, 1987. View at Scopus
  3. D. Egle, B. Grissemann, A. G. Zeimet, E. Müller-Holzner, and C. Marth, “Validation of intraoperative risk assessment on frozen section for surgical management of endometrial carcinoma,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 110, no. 3, pp. 286–292, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  4. R. C. Boronow, C. P. Morrow, W. T. Creasman, et al., “Surgical staging in endometrial cancer: clinical-pathologic findings of a prospective study,” Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 63, no. 6, pp. 825–832, 1984. View at Scopus
  5. M. S. Piver, J. J. Barlow, and S. B. Lele, “Para-aortic lymph node metastasis in FIGO stage I endometrial carcinoma. Value of surgical staging and results of treatment,” New York State Journal of Medicine, vol. 82, no. 9, pp. 1321–1324, 1982. View at Scopus
  6. A. Mariani, S. C. Dowdy, W. A. Cliby et al., “Prospective assessment of lymphatic dissemination in endometrial cancer: a paradigm shift in surgical staging,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 109, no. 1, pp. 11–18, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. T. Hidaka, K. Kato, R. Yonezawa et al., “Omission of lymphadenectomy is possible for low-risk corpus cancer,” European Journal of Surgical Oncology, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 86–90, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. G. H. Eltabbakh, J. Shamonki, and S. L. Mount, “Surgical stage, final grade, and survival of women with endometrial carcinoma whose preoperative endometrial biopsy shows well-differentiated tumors,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 99, no. 2, pp. 309–312, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. M. E. Sherman, B. M. Ronnett, O. B. Ioffe et al., “Reproducibility of biopsy diagnoses of endometrial hyperplasia: evidence supporting a simplified classification,” International Journal of Gynecological Pathology, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 318–325, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. E. R. Myers, S. Silva, K. Barnhart et al., “Interobserver and intraobserver variability in the histological dating of the endometrium in fertile and infertile women,” Fertility and Sterility, vol. 82, no. 5, pp. 1278–1282, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. R. R. Taylor, J. Zeller, R. W. Lieberman, and D. M. O'Connor, “An analysis of two versus three grades for endometrial carcinoma,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 3–6, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. B. S. Kendall, B. M. Ronnett, C. Isacson et al., “Reproducibility of the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia, atypical hyperplasia, and well-differentiated carcinoma,” American Journal of Surgical Pathology, vol. 22, no. 8, pp. 1012–1019, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. S. Smith, S. Hosid, and L. Scott, “Endometrial biopsy dating: interobserver variation and its impact on clinical practice,” Journal of Reproductive Medicine for the Obstetrician and Gynecologist, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 1–3, 1995. View at Scopus
  14. A. N. Scholten, V. T. H. B. M. Smit, H. Beerman, W. L. J. Van Putten, and C. L. Creutzberg, “Prognostic significance and interobserver variability of histologic grading systems for endometrial carcinoma,” Cancer, vol. 100, no. 4, pp. 764–772, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. C. Crum and L. L. K. M. G. Duska, “Adenocarcinoma, carcinosarcoma and other epithelial tumors of the endometrium,” in Diagnostic Gynecologic and Obstetric Pathology, C. Crum and K. R. Lee, Eds., Elsevier Saunders, 2006.
  16. B. M. Ronnett, R. Zaino, L. Ellenson, and R. J. Kurman, “Endometrial carcinoma,” in Blaustein's Pathology of the Female Genital Tract, R. J. Kurman, Ed., Springer, New York, NY, USA, 5th edition, 2001.
  17. B. Nordström, P. Strang, A. Lindgren, R. Bergström, and B. Tribukait, “Carcinoma of the endometrium: do the nuclear grade and DNA ploidy provide more prognostic information than do the FIGO and WHO classifications?” International Journal of Gynecological Pathology, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 191–201, 1996.
  18. C. L. Trimble, J. Kauderer, R. Zaino et al., “Concurrent endometrial carcinoma in women with a biopsy diagnosis of atypical endometrial hyperplasia: a gynecologic oncology group study,” Cancer, vol. 106, no. 4, pp. 812–819, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. J. R. Landis and G. G. Koch, “The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data,” Biometrics, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 159–174, 1977. View at Scopus
  20. T. J. Selman, C. H. Mann, J. Zamora, and K. S. Khan, “A systematic review of tests for lymph node status in primary endometrial cancer,” BMC Women's Health, vol. 8, article 8, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. A. Mariani, S. C. Dowdy, W. A. Cliby et al., “Prospective assessment of lymphatic dissemination in endometrial cancer: a paradigm shift in surgical staging,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 109, no. 1, pp. 11–18, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. M. M. Leitao, “Current and future surgical approaches in the management of endometrial carcinoma,” Future Oncology, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 389–401, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. R. C. Boronow, “Endometrial cancer and lymph node surgery: the spins continue—a case for reason,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 111, no. 1, pp. 3–6, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. T. Hidaka, K. Kato, R. Yonezawa et al., “Omission of lymphadenectomy is possible for low-risk corpus cancer,” European Journal of Surgical Oncology, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 86–90, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. J. K. Chan, H. Wu, M. K. Cheung, J. Y. Shin, K. Osann, and D. S. Kapp, “The outcomes of 27,063 women with unstaged endometrioid uterine cancer,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 106, no. 2, pp. 282–288, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. A. N. Scholten, W. L. J. Van Putten, H. Beerman et al., “Postoperative radiotherapy for Stage 1 endometrial carcinoma: long-term outcome of the randomized PORTEC trial with central pathology review,” International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 834–838, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. A. Mariani, M. J. Webb, G. L. Keeney, M. G. Haddock, G. Calori, and K. C. Podratz, “Low-risk corpus cancer: is lymphadenectomy or radiotherapy necessary?” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 182, no. 6, pp. 1506–1519, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. D. S. Mohan, M. A. Samuels, M. A. Selim et al., “Long-term outcomes of therapeutic pelvic lymphadenectomy for stage I endometrial adenocarcinoma,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 70, no. 2, pp. 165–171, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. J. Aalders, V. Abeler, P. Kolstad, and M. Onsrud, “Postoperative external irradiation and prognostic parameters in stage I endometrial carcinoma. Clinical and histopathologic study of 540 patients,” Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 419–427, 1980. View at Scopus
  30. S. Nofech-Mozes, Z. Ghorab, N. Ismiil et al., “Endometrial endometrioid adenocarcinoma: a pathologic analysis of 827 consecutive cases,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 129, no. 1, pp. 110–114, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. M. M. Leitao, “Current and future surgical approaches in the management of endometrial carcinoma,” Future Oncology, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 389–401, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. J. S. Kwon, M. S. Carey, E. F. Cook, F. Qiu, and L. Paszat, “Patterns of practice and outcomes in intermediate- and high-risk stage I and II endometrial cancer: a population-based study,” International Journal of Gynecological Cancer, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 433–440, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. B. W. Corn, C. J. Dunton, J. A. Carlson, Y. Xie, and R. K. Valicenti, “National trends in the surgical staging of corpus cancer: a pattern-of- practice survey,” Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 90, no. 4, pp. 628–631, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. J. Aalders, V. Abeler, P. Kolstad, and M. Onsrud, “Postoperative external irradiation and prognostic parameters in stage I endometrial carcinoma. Clinical and histopathologic study of 540 patients,” Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 419–427, 1980. View at Scopus
  35. J. K. Chan, H. Wu, M. K. Cheung, J. Y. Shin, K. Osann, and D. S. Kapp, “The outcomes of 27,063 women with unstaged endometrioid uterine cancer,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 106, no. 2, pp. 282–288, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. J. S. Kwon, M. S. Carey, E. F. Cook, F. Qiu, and L. Paszat, “Patterns of practice and outcomes in intermediate- and high-risk stage I and II endometrial cancer: a population-based study,” International Journal of Gynecological Cancer, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 433–440, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. P. Y. Roland, F. J. Kelly, C. Y. Kulwicki, P. Blitzer, M. Curcio, and J. W. Orr, “The benefits of a gynecologic oncologist: a pattern of care study for endometrial cancer treatment,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 125–130, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. J. S. Kwon, M. S. Carey, S. J. Goldie, and J. J. Kim, “Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment strategies for Stage I and II endometrial cancer,” Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 131–139, 2007. View at Scopus
  39. A. Mariani, M. J. Webb, G. L. Keeney, M. G. Haddock, G. Calori, and K. C. Podratz, “Low-risk corpus cancer: is lymphadenectomy or radiotherapy necessary?” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 182, no. 6, pp. 1506–1519, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. J. K. Chan, H. Wu, M. K. Cheung, J. Y. Shin, K. Osann, and D. S. Kapp, “The outcomes of 27,063 women with unstaged endometrioid uterine cancer,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 106, no. 2, pp. 282–288, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. S. Nofech-Mozes, Z. Ghorab, N. Ismiil et al., “Endometrial endometrioid adenocarcinoma: a pathologic analysis of 827 consecutive cases,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 129, no. 1, pp. 110–114, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. J. K. Chan, H. Wu, M. K. Cheung, J. Y. Shin, K. Osann, and D. S. Kapp, “The outcomes of 27,063 women with unstaged endometrioid uterine cancer,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 106, no. 2, pp. 282–288, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. M. M. Leitao, “Current and future surgical approaches in the management of endometrial carcinoma,” Future Oncology, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 389–401, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. R. R. Taylor, J. Zeller, R. W. Lieberman, and D. M. O'Connor, “An analysis of two versus three grades for endometrial carcinoma,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 3–6, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. S. F. Lax, R. J. Kurman, E. S. Pizer, L. Wu, and B. M. Ronnett, “A binary architectural grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma has superior reproducibility compared with FIGO grading and identifies subsets of advance-stage tumors with favorable and unfavorable prognosis,” American Journal of Surgical Pathology, vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 1201–1208, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. M. E. Sherman, B. M. Ronnett, O. B. Ioffe et al., “Reproducibility of biopsy diagnoses of endometrial hyperplasia: evidence supporting a simplified classification,” International Journal of Gynecological Pathology, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 318–325, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. B. S. Kendall, B. M. Ronnett, C. Isacson et al., “Reproducibility of the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia, atypical hyperplasia, and well-differentiated carcinoma,” American Journal of Surgical Pathology, vol. 22, no. 8, pp. 1012–1019, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. A. N. Scholten, V. T. H. B. M. Smit, H. Beerman, W. L. J. Van Putten, and C. L. Creutzberg, “Prognostic significance and interobserver variability of histologic grading systems for endometrial carcinoma,” Cancer, vol. 100, no. 4, pp. 764–772, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. S. F. Lax, R. J. Kurman, E. S. Pizer, L. Wu, and B. M. Ronnett, “A binary architectural grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma has superior reproducibility compared with FIGO grading and identifies subsets of advance-stage tumors with favorable and unfavorable prognosis,” American Journal of Surgical Pathology, vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 1201–1208, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. S. Sagae, T. Saito, M. Satoh et al., “The reproducibility of a binary tumor grading system for uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma, compared with FIGO system and nuclear grading,” Oncology, vol. 67, no. 5-6, pp. 344–350, 2004. View at Scopus
  51. M. M. Leitao, “Current and future surgical approaches in the management of endometrial carcinoma,” Future Oncology, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 389–401, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. J. Mitchard and L. Hirschowitz, “Concordance of FIGO grade of endometrial adenocarcinomas in biopsy and hysterectomy specimens,” Histopathology, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 372–378, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. X. Wang, Z. Huang, W. Di, and Q. Lin, “Comparison of D&C and hysterectomy pathologic findings in endometrial cancer patients,” Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, vol. 272, no. 2, pp. 136–141, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. G. H. Eltabbakh, J. Shamonki, and S. L. Mount, “Surgical stage, final grade, and survival of women with endometrial carcinoma whose preoperative endometrial biopsy shows well-differentiated tumors,” Gynecologic Oncology, vol. 99, no. 2, pp. 309–312, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus