Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2010 Mar;183(3):952-7.
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.11.024. Epub 2010 Jan 18.

Discrepancy between local and central pathological review of radical prostatectomy specimens

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Discrepancy between local and central pathological review of radical prostatectomy specimens

Kentaro Kuroiwa et al. J Urol. 2010 Mar.

Abstract

Purpose: Pathological assessment of radical prostatectomy specimens has not been uniform among pathologists. We investigated interobserver variability of radical prostatectomy specimen reviews between local and central pathologists.

Materials and methods: We collated data from 50 institutions on 2,015 patients with cT1c-3 prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy between 1997 and 2005. All radical prostatectomy specimens were retrospectively reevaluated by a central uropathologist. Gleason score, extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion, lymph node involvement, positive surgical margin, year of diagnosis and pathology volume were recorded.

Results: The exact concordance rate of Gleason score between local and central review was 54.8%, and under grading and over grading rates at local review were 25.9% and 19.2%, respectively. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was 0.61 for local and central radical prostatectomy Gleason score. The exact concordance rate of Gleason score 8-10 at local review was significantly lower than that of Gleason score 5-6, 3 + 4 and 4 + 3 at local review (p = 0.011, <0.001 and 0.006). Exact concordance rates between local and central review for extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion, lymph node involvement and positive surgical margin were 82.5%, 97.6%, 99.6% and 87.5%, respectively. High volume institutions and recently diagnosed cohorts showed significantly higher exact concordance rates between local and central review for radical prostatectomy Gleason score and other pathological features (all p <0.001).

Conclusions: High volume institutions and recent series show higher concordance between local and central review of radical prostatectomy pathology. However, concordance for high grade Gleason score, extracapsular extension and surgical margin status remains poor. Radical prostatectomy specimens should be reevaluated in a multi-institutional study for more accurate pathological data.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Second opinions in pathology.
    Wheeler T. Wheeler T. J Urol. 2010 Mar;183(3):850-1. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.12.064. Epub 2010 Jan 20. J Urol. 2010. PMID: 20089265 No abstract available.

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types