Thyroid carcinomas display several pathologic features, show different behavior and necessitate different treatment; thus correct classification is mandatory.
Methods
The kappa statistic was used as a measure of agreement in a panel of seven pathologists who reviewed 200 cases of thyroid tumors.
Results
Overall agreement was 83 % (k = 68). Good agreement was found for anaplastic (k = 0.85) and papillary carcinomas (k = 0.81); agreement for medullary carcinoma was acceptable (k = 0.80), suboptimal for other (k = 0.67), and poor for follicular carcinoma (k = 0.54).
Conclusions
Central pathology review of thyroid carcinomas is recommended when clinical and epidemiologic trials are planned.
ArgyleJ.C., BenjaminD.R., LampkinB., HammondD.: Acute nonlymphocytic leukemias of childhood. Inter-observer variability and problems in the use of the FAB classification. Cancer, 63: 295–301, 1989.
3.
BartkoJ.J.: The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability. Psychol. Rep., 19: 3–11, 1966.
4.
BeckJ.S.: Observer variability in reporting of breast lesions. J. Clin. Pathol., 38: 1358–1365, 1985.
5.
CasaraD., RubelloD., SaladiniS., De Besi, FassinaA.S., BusnardoB.: Thyroid carcinoma in the elderly. Aging, 4: 333–339, 1992.
6.
CohenJ.: A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ. Psychol. Measurement, 20: 37–46, 1960.
7.
CohenJ.: Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychol. Bull., 7: 213–220, 1968.
8.
CramerS.F., RothL.M., UlbrightT.M., MazurM.T., NunezC.A., GersellD.J., MillsS.E., KrausF.T.: Evaluation of the reproducibility of the World Health Organization classification of common ovarian cancers. With emphasis on methodology. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med., 111: 819–829, 1987.
9.
CramerS.F.: Methods for evaluating reproducibiliy in anatomic pathology letter. Hum. Pathol., 19: 1472–1473, 1988.
10.
DaleI., LexowP., SkjortenF., StenwigJ.T., BrandtzaegP.: Reproducibility of tumor typing of lung carcinomas performed according to WHO's recommendation. APMIS, 97: 351–356, 1989.
11.
DelidesG.S., GarasG., GeorgouliG., JiortziotisD., LeccaJ., LivaT., ElomenoglouJ.: Intralaboratory variations in the grading of breast carcinoma. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med., 106: 126–128, 1982.
12.
EvansD.M.D., ShelleyG., ClearyB., BaldwinY.: Observer variation and quality control of cytodiagnosis. J. Clin. Pathol., 27: 945–950, 1974.
13.
EverittB.S.: Moments of the statistics kappa and weighted kappa. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol., 21: 97–103, 1968.
14.
FalckV.G., NovelliM.R., WrightN.A., AlexanderN.: Gastric dysplasia: Interobserver variation, sulphomucin staining and nucleolar organizer region counting. Histopathology, 16: 141–149, 1990.
15.
FeinsteinA.R.: A bibliography of publications on observer variability. J. Chron. Dis., 38: 619–632, 1985.
16.
FleissJ.L., CohenJ., EverittB.S.: Large sample standard errors of kappa and weighted kappa. Psychol. Bull., 72: 323–327, 1969.
17.
FleissJ.L.: Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol. Bull., 76: 378–382, 1971.
18.
FleissJ.L., CohenJ.: The equivalence of weighted kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Educ. Psychol. Measurement, 33: 613–619, 1973.
19.
FleissJ.L., NeeJ.C.M., LandisJ.R.: Large sample variance of kappa in the case of different sets of raters. Psychol. Bull., 86: 974–977, 1979.
20.
FleissJ.L.: Statistical Methods for Rates on Proportion.J. Wiley and Sons, New York, 1980.
21.
FranssilaK., SaxenE., TeppoL., BjarnasonO., TuliniusH., NormanT., RingertzN.: Incidence of different morphological types of thyroid cancer in the nordic countries. APMIS, A, 88: 49–55, 1981.
GehanE.A., KantarjianL.: Preliminary report of the study of 200 patients according to the proposed international classification for rhabdomyosarcoma. Letter for Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Nov. 3, 1989.
24.
GlenthojA., SehestedM.: Histological and cytological fine needle biopsies from focal liver lesions. APMIS, 97: 611–618, 1989.
25.
GreenbergS.D., FraireA.E., KinnerB.M., JohnsonE.H.: Tumor cell type versus staging in the prognosis of carcinoma of the lung. Pathol. Annu., 22: 387–405, 1987.
26.
HanleyJ.A.: Standard error of the kappa statistic. Psychol. Bull., 102: 315–321, 1987.
27.
HastrupN., Hamilton-DutoitS., RalfiakerE., PallesenG.: Peripheral T-cell lymphomas: an evaluation of reproducibility of the updated Kiel classification. Histopathology, 18: 99–105, 1991.
28.
HabardJ.B.: Nomenclature of thyroid tumors. In: Thyroid Neoplasia, YoungS., InmanD.R. (Eds.), pp. 3–37. Academic Press, London, 1968.
29.
HedingerC., WilliamsE.D., SobinL.H.: The WHO histological classification of thyroid tumor: a commentary on the second edition. Cancer, 63: 908–911, 1989.
30.
HedingerC., SobinL.H.: Histological typing of thyroid tumours. No 11. In: International Classification of Tumours, World Health Organization, Geneva, 1974.
31.
HedingerC., WilliamsE.D., SobinL.H.: Histological typing of thyroid tumours. II edition. No 11. In: International Histological Classification of Tumours, World Health Organization. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1988.
32.
HolmL.-E., LowhagenT., SilfverswardC.: The reliability of malignant thyroid tumor diagnosis in the Swedish Cancer Registry. APMIS, A, 88: 251–254, 1980.
33.
HolmanC.D.J., JamesI.R., HeenanP.J.: An improved method of analysis of observer variation between pathologists. Histopathology, 6: 581–589, 1982.
JonesS.E., ButlerJ.J., ByrneG.E.Jr., ColtmanC.A., MoonT.E.: Histopathologic review of lymphoma cases from the Southwest Oncology Group. Cancer, 39: 1071–1076, 1977.
36.
KimH., ZelmanR.J., FoxM.A., BennettJ.M., BerardC.W., ButlerJ.J., ByrneG.E.Jr., DorfmanR.F., HartsockR.J., LukesR.J., MannR.B., NeimanR.S., RebukJ.W., SheehanW.W., VariakolisD., WilsonG.F., RappaportH.: Pathology panel for lymphoma clinical studies: a comprehensive analysis of cases accumulated since its inception. JNCI, 68: 43–67, 1982.
37.
LandisJ.R., KochG.G.: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33: 159–174, 1977.
38.
LandisJ.R., KochG.G.: An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics, 33: 363–374, 1977.
39.
LightR.J.: Measures of response agreement for qualitative data: some generalizations and alternatives. Psychol. Bull., 76: 365–377, 1971.
40.
LindsayS.: Carcinoma of the thyroid gland.C.C. Thomas, Springfield, 1960.
41.
LiVolsiV.: Surgical Pathology of the Thyroid. Vol. 22: Major Problems in Pathology, W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia, 1990.
42.
LundB., ThomsenH.K., OlsenJ.: Reproducibility of histopathological evaluation in epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Clinical implications. APMIS, 99: 353–358, 1991.
43.
NaujoksH., StrohmeierR., BickerT., van Driel-KulkerA.M.J., KnepfleC.F.H.M., PloemJ.S.: Interobserver variability in the cytological diagnosis of 1500 Papanicolaou stained cervical monolayer specimens. Pathol. Res. Pract., 186: 150–153, 1990.
44.
NielsenB.M., KoppangH.S., DabelsteenE.: Reproducibility of two malignancy grading systems with reportedly prognostic value for oral cancer patients. J. Oral. Pathol. Med., 20: 369–372, 1991.
45.
OomsE.C., AndersonW.A., AlonsC.L., BoonM.E., VeldhuizenR.W.: Analysis of the performance of pathologists in the grading of bladder tumors. Hum. Pathol., 14: 144–150, 1983.
46.
ReidB.J., HaggitR.C., RubinC.E., TothG., SurawiczC.M., van BelleG., LewinK., WeinsteinW.M., AntonioliD.A., GoldmanH., MacDonaldW., OwenD.: Observer variation in the diagnosis of dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus. Hum. Pathol., 19: 166–178, 1988.
SaxenE., FranssilaK., BjarnasonO., NormannT., RingertsN.: Observer variation in histologic classification of thyroid cancer. Acta Path. Microbiol. Scand. A, 86: 483–486, 1978.
52.
SilcocksP.B.S.: Measuring repeatability and validity of histological diagnosis - a brief review with some practical examples. J. Clin. Pathol., 36: 1269–1275, 1983.
53.
SilverbergS.G.: Reproducibility of the mitosis count in the histologic diagnosis of smooth muscle tumors of the uterus. Hum. Pathol., 7: 451–454, 1976.
54.
SobinL.H.: International classification of tumors. Second edition. Cancer, 63: 807, 1989.
55.
StenkvistB., BengtssonE., ErikssonO., JarkansT., NordinB., Westman-NaeserS.: Histopathological systems of breast cancer classification: reproducibility and clinical significance. J. Clin. Pathol., 36: 392–398, 1983.
56.
SvanholmH., StarklintH., BarleboH., OlsenS.: Histological evaluation of prostatic cancer. 1. Reproducibility of tumor type. APMIS, 97: 699–704, 1989.
57.
SvanholmH., StarklintH., BarleboH., OlsenS.: Histological evaluation of prostatic cancer. 2. Reproducibility of a histological grading system. APMIS, 98: 229–236, 1990.
58.
SvanholmH., StarklintH., BarleboH., OlsenS.: Histological evaluation of prostatic cancer. 3. Reproducibility of assessment of tumor volume and its possible significance for prognosis. APMIS, 98: 236–243, 1990.
59.
SvanholmH., StarklintH., GundersenH.J.G., BarleboH., OlsenS.: Reproducibility of histomorphologic diagnoses with special reference to the kappa statistic. APMIS, 97: 689–698, 1989.
60.
TannerM.A., YoungM.C.: Modelling agreement among raters. J. Am. Stat. Ass., 80: 175–180, 1985.
61.
TheG.L.I.M.: System 1985 Release 3.77, Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd, Oxford, U.K.
62.
The Gauss System, version 2.1, Apteach System Inc., Washington, D.C.1990.
63.
TheodossiA., SkeneA.M., PortmannB., Knill-JonesR.P., PatrickR.S., TateR.A., KealeyW., JarvisK.J., O'BrianD.J., WilliamsR.: Observer variation in assessment of liver biopsies including analysis by kappa statistics. Gastroenterology, 79: 232–241, 1980.
64.
ThomasG.D.H., DixonM.F., SmeetonN.C., WilliamsN.S.: Observer variation in the histological grading of rectal carcinoma. J. Clin. Pathol., 36: 385–391, 1983.
65.
TwijnstraA., ThunnissenF.B.J., LassouwG., VolovicsA., Ten VeldeG.P.M.: The role of the histologic subclassification of tumor cells in patients with small cell carcinoma of the lung and central nervous system metastases. Cancer, 65, 8: 1812–1815, 1990.
66.
UebersaxJ.S.: Diversity of decision-making models and the measurement of interrater agreement. Psychol. Bull., 101: 140–146, 1987.
Van der PoelH.G., BoonM.E., van der MeulenE.A., Wijsman-GrootedorstA.: The reproducibility of cytomorphometrical grading of bladder tumors. Virchows Arch. A Pathol. Anat., 416: 521–525, 1990.
69.
van ThielT.P.H., van der LindenJ.C., BaakJ.P.A., van de SandtM.M., van GalenC., BezemerP.D.: Reproducibility of flow cytometric assessment of follicular tumors of the thyroid. J. Clin. Pathol., 42: 260–263, 1989.
WoolmerL.B., BeahrsO.H., BlackM., McConaheyW.M., KeatingF.R.: Classification and prognosis of thyroid carcinoma: a study of 885 cases observed in a 30 year period. Am. J. Surg., 102: 354–387, 1961.
