Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Analytical Cellular Pathology
Volume 2014, Article ID 157308, 10 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/157308
Research Article

Observer Performance in the Use of Digital and Optical Microscopy for the Interpretation of Tissue-Based Biomarkers

1Division of Imaging, Diagnostics, and Software Reliability, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA
2Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
3Leica Biosystems, Vista, CA 92081, USA

Received 17 April 2014; Accepted 15 July 2014

Copyright © 2014 Marios A. Gavrielides 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. L. Pantanowitz, P. N. Valenstein, A. J. Evans et al., “Review of the current state of whole slide imaging in pathology,” Journal of Pathology Informatics, vol. 2, pp. 1–10, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  2. R. S. Weinstein, A. R. Graham, L. C. Richter et al., “Overview of telepathology, virtual microscopy, and whole slide imaging: prospects for the future,” Human Pathology, vol. 40, no. 8, pp. 1057–1069, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. S. Al-Janabi, A. Huisman, and P. J. Van Diest, “Digital pathology: current status and future perspectives,” Histopathology, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. P. N. Furness, “The use of digital images in pathology,” Journal of Pathology, vol. 183, pp. 253–263, 1997. View at Google Scholar
  5. L. Pantanowitz, J. H. Sinard, W. H. Henricks et al., “Validating whole slide imaging for diagnostic purposes in pathology: guideline from the College of American Pathologists Pathology and Laboratory Quality Center,” Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, vol. 137, pp. 1710–1722, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  6. K. E. Brick, J. C. Sluzevich, M. A. Cappel, D. J. Dicaudo, N. I. Comfere, and C. N. Wieland, “Comparison of virtual microscopy and glass slide microscopy among dermatology residents during a simulated in-training examination,” Journal of Cutaneous Pathology, vol. 40, no. 9, pp. 807–811, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. S. S. P. Costello, D. J. Johnston, P. A. Dervan, and D. G. O'Shea, “Development and evaluation of the virtual pathology slide: a new tool in telepathology,” Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 5, no. 2, article e11, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. J. R. Gilbertson, J. Ho, L. Anthony, D. M. Jukic, Y. Yagi, and A. V. Parwani, “Primary histologic diagnosis using automated whole slide imaging: A Validation Study,” BMC Clinical Pathology, vol. 6, article 4, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. H. O. Helin, M. E. Lundin, M. Laakso, J. Lundin, H. J. Helin, and J. Isola, “Virtual microscopy in prostate histopathology: simultaneous viewing of biopsies stained sequentially with hematoxylin and eosin, and α-methylacyl-coenzyme A racemase/p63 immunohistochemistry,” Journal of Urology, vol. 175, no. 2, pp. 495–499, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. B. McCullough, X. Ying, T. Monticello, and M. Bonnefoi, “Digital microscopy imaging and new approaches in toxicologic pathology,” Toxicologic Pathology, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 49–58, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. B. Molnar, L. Berczi, C. Diczhazy et al., “Digital slide and virtual microscopy based routine and telepathology evaluation of routine gastrointestinal biopsy specimens,” Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 433–438, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. G. Puppa, C. Senore, K. Sheahan et al., “Diagnostic reproducibility of tumour budding in colorectal cancer: a multicentre, multinational study using virtual microscopy,” Histopathology, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 562–575, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. D. S. A. Sanders, H. Grabsch, R. Harrison et al., “Comparing virtual with conventional microscopy for the consensus diagnosis of Barrett's neoplasia in the AspECT Barrett's chemoprevention trial pathology audit,” Histopathology, vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 795–800, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. D. S. Weinberg, F. A. Allaert, P. Dusserre et al., “Telepathology diagnosis by means of digital still images: An International Validation Study,” Human Pathology, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 111–118, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. A. R. Jara-Lazaro, T. P. Thamboo, M. Teh, and P. H. Tan, “Digital pathology: exploring its applications in diagnostic surgical pathology practice,” Pathology, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 512–518, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. B. H. Hall, M. Ianosi-Irimie, P. Javidian, W. Chen, S. Ganesan, and D. J. Foran, “Computer-assisted assessment of the Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 immunohistochemical assay in imaged histologic sections using a membrane isolation algorithm and quantitative analysis of positive controls,” BMC Medical Imaging, vol. 8, article 11, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. A. S. Joshi, G. M. Sharangpani, K. Porter et al., “Semi-automated imaging system to quantitate Her-2/neu membrane receptor immunoreactivity in human breast cancer,” Cytometry Part A, vol. 71, no. 5, pp. 273–285, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. I. Skaland, I. Øvestad, E. A. M. Janssen et al., “Comparing subjective and digital image analysis HER2/neu expression scores with conventional and modified FISH scores in breast cancer,” Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 68–71, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. H.-A. Lehr, T. W. Jacobs, H. Yaziji, S. J. Schnitt, and A. M. Gown, “Quantitative evaluation of HER-2/neu status in breast cancer by fluorescence in situ hybridization and by immunohistochemistry with image analysis,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 115, no. 6, pp. 814–822, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. K. A. Matkowskyj, D. Schonfeld, and R. V. Benya, “Quantitative immunohistochemistry by measuring cumulative signal strength using commercially available software Photoshop and Matlab,” Journal of Histochemistry and Cytochemistry, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 303–311, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. Y. Hatanaka, K. Hashizume, Y. Kamihara et al., “Quantitative immunohistochemical evaluation of HER2/neu expression with HercepTest in breast carcinoma by image analysis,” Pathology International, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 33–36, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. H. Masmoudi, S. M. Hewitt, N. Petrick, K. J. Myers, and M. A. Gavrielides, “Automated quantitative assessment of HER-2/neu immunohistochemical expression in breast cancer,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 916–925, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. R. Mofidi, R. Walsh, P. F. Ridgway et al., “Objective measurement of breast cancer oestrogen receptor status through digital image analysis,” European Journal of Surgical Oncology, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 20–24, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. K. A. DiVito, A. J. Berger, R. L. Camp, M. Dolled-Filhart, D. L. Rimm, and H. M. Kluger, “Automated quantitative analysis of tissue microarrays reveals an association between high Bcl-2 expression and improved outcome in melanoma,” Cancer Research, vol. 64, no. 23, pp. 8773–8777, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. A. S. Elhafey, J. C. Papadimitriou, M. S. El-Hakim, A. I. El-Said, B. B. Ghannam, and S. G. Silverberg, “Computerized image analysis of p53 and proliferating cell nuclear antigen expression in benign, hyperplastic, and malignant endometrium,” Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, vol. 125, no. 7, pp. 872–879, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. B. Keller, W. Chen, and M. A. Gavrielides, “Quantitative assessment and classification of tissue-based biomarker expression with color content analysis,” Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, vol. 136, no. 5, pp. 539–550, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. S. Wang, M. H. Saboorian, E. P. Frenkel et al., “Assessment of HER-2/neun status in breast cancer: Automated Cellular Imaging System (ACIS)-assisted quantitation of immunohistochemical assay achieves high accuracy in comparison with fluorescence in situ hybridization assay as the standard,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 116, no. 4, pp. 495–503, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. A. Ciampa, B. Xu, G. Ayata et al., “HER-2 status in breast cancer: correlation of gene amplification by FISH with immunohistochemistry expression using advanced cellular imaging system,” Applied Immunohistochemistry and Molecular Morphology, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 132–137, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. K. Bloom and D. Harrington, “Enhanced accuracy and reliability of HER-2/neu immunohistochemical scoring using digital microscopy,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 121, no. 5, pp. 620–630, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. O. W. Tawfik, B. F. Kimler, M. Davis et al., “Comparison of immunohistochemistry by automated cellular imaging system (ACIS) versus fluorescence in-situ hybridization in the evaluation of HER-2/neu expression in primary breast carcinoma,” Histopathology, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 258–267, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. D. Lüftner, P. Henschke, A. Kafka et al., “Discordant results obtained for different methods of HER-2/neu testing in breast cancer—a question of standardization, automation and timing,” International Journal of Biological Markers, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 1–13, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. M. Cregger, A. J. Berger, and D. L. Rimm, “Immunohistochemistry and quantitative analysis of protein expression,” Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, vol. 130, no. 7, pp. 1026–1030, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. A. Nassar, C. Cohen, S. S. Agersborg et al., “Trainable immunohistochemical HER2/neu image analysis: A Multisite Performance Study using 260 breast tissue specimens,” Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, vol. 135, no. 7, pp. 896–902, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. C. M. Conway, D. O'Shea, S. O'Brien et al., “The development and validation of the Virtual Tissue Matrix, a software application that facilitates the review of tissue microarrays on line,” BMC Bioinformatics, vol. 7, article 256, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. C. Conway, L. Dobson, A. O'Grady, E. Kay, S. Costello, and D. O'Shea, “Virtual microscopy as an enabler of automated/quantitative assessment of protein expression in TMAs,” Histochemistry and Cell Biology, vol. 130, no. 3, pp. 447–463, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. A. Nassar, C. Cohen, M. Albitar et al., “Reading immunohistochemical slides on a computer monitor—A Multisite Performance Study using 180 HER2-stained breast carcinomas,” Applied Immunohistochemistry & Molecular Morphology, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 212–217, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  37. Y. Kondo, T. Iijima, and M. Noguchi, “Evaluation of immunohistochemical staining using whole-slide imaging for HER2 scoring of breast cancer in comparison with real glass slides,” Pathology International, vol. 62, no. 9, pp. 592–599, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. J. L. Fine, D. M. Grzybicki, R. Silowash et al., “Evaluation of whole slide image immunohistochemistry interpretation in challenging prostate needle biopsies,” Human Pathology, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 564–572, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. P. J. Van Diest, P. Van Dam, S. C. Henzen-Logmans et al., “A scoring system for immunohistochemical staining: consensus report of the task force for basic research of the EORTC-GCCG,” Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 50, no. 10, pp. 801–804, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. M. A. Gavrielides, B. D. Gallas, P. Lenz, A. Badano, and S. M. Hewitt, “Observer variability in the interpretation of HER2/neu immunohistochemical expression with unaided and computer-aided digital microscopy,” Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, vol. 135, no. 2, pp. 233–242, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. S. V. Makkink-Nombrado, J. P. A. Baak, L. Schuurmans, J.-W. Theeuwes, and T. Van der Aa, “Quantitative immunohistochemistry using the CAS 200/486 image analysis system in invasive breast carcinoma: A Reproducibility Study,” Analytical Cellular Pathology, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 227–245, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. S. M. Hewitt, “Design, construction, and use of tissue microarrays,” in Protein Arrays: Methods and Protocols, E. T. Fung, Ed., pp. 61–72, Humana Press, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  43. J. Kononen, L. Bubendorf, A. Kallioniemi et al., “Tissue microarrays for high-throughput molecular profiling of tumor specimens,” Nature Medicine, vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 844–847, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. M. Lejeune, J. Jaén, L. Pons et al., “Quantification of diverse subcellular immunohistochemical markers with clinicobiological relevancies: validation of a new computer-assisted image analysis procedure,” Journal of Anatomy, vol. 212, no. 6, pp. 868–878, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. A. C. Wolff, M. E. H. Hammond, J. N. Schwartz et al., “American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 118–145, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. T. Hasegawa, Standardization of Ki-67 Immunohistochemical Staining for Diagnosing Grade of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor (GIST), 2008.
  47. J. Gerdes, U. Schwab, H. Lemke, and H. Stein, “Production of a mouse monoclonal antibody reactive with a human nuclear antigen associated with cell proliferation,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 13–20, 1983. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. M. Dowsett, T. O. Nielsen, R. A'Hern et al., “Assessment of Ki67 in Breast Cancer: recommendations from the international Ki67 in breast cancer working Group,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 103, no. 22, pp. 1656–1664, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. E. D. Hsi and R. R. Tubbs, “Guidelines for HER2 testing in the UK,” Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 241–242, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. M. Kendall, Rank Correlation Methods, Charles Griffin and Co. Limited, London, UK, 1948.
  51. R. F. Woolson and W. R. Clarke, Statistical Methods for the Analysis of Biomedical Data, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 1987.
  52. T. W. Bauer, L. Schoenfield, R. J. Slaw, L. Yerian, Z. Sun, and W. H. Henricks, “Validation of whole slide imaging for primary diagnosis in surgical pathology,” Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, vol. 137, no. 4, pp. 518–524, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. W. S. Campbell, S. M. Lele, W. W. West, A. J. Lazenby, L. M. Smith, and S. H. Hinrichs, “Concordance between whole-slide imaging and light microscopy for routine surgical pathology,” Human Pathology, vol. 43, no. 10, pp. 1739–1744, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. W. H. Henricks, “Evaluation of whole slide imaging for routine surgical pathology: looking through a broader scope,” Journal of Pathology Informatics, vol. 3, article 39, 2012. View at Google Scholar