Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Cancer Causes & Control
Published in: Cancer Causes & Control 4/2013

01-04-2013 | Original paper

Agreement for tumor grade of ovarian carcinoma: analysis of archival tissues from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results residual tissue repository

Authors: Rayna K. Matsuno, Mark E. Sherman, Kala Visvanathan, Marc T. Goodman, Brenda Y. Hernandez, Charles F. Lynch, Olga B. Ioffe, David Horio, Charles Platz, Sean F. Altekruse, Ruth M. Pfeiffer, William F. Anderson

Published in: Cancer Causes & Control | Issue 4/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Emerging data suggest that ovarian cancers differ by tumor grade. However, the reliability of microscopic grade from paraffin tissue in the general medical community and as reflected in population-based cancer registries is unknown.

Methods

We examined grade agreement between two gynecologic pathologists and the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results Residual Tissue Repository (SEER). Grade agreement was assessed with percent observer agreement and kappa coefficients for 664 invasive ovarian carcinomas, using previously defined three-tier and two-tier grading systems. A random subset of ovarian carcinomas was selected to compare intra- and inter-pathologist agreement.

Results

Five hundred and eighty-six of SEER’s 664 tumors were confirmed invasive. Percent agreement was 49 % with fair kappa coefficient = 0.25 (95 % CI: 0.20–0.30) for the 664 tumors. Agreement improved slightly when restricted to the 586 confirmed invasive cancers; it was better for high grade than low grade tumors, for two-tier than three-tier grading systems, and within (66 %) than between study pathologists (43 %). Grade was not a robust independent predictor of ovarian cancer-specific survival.

Conclusions

Grade agreement was fair between SEER and study pathologists irrespective of grading system. Recorded grade in SEER should be used with caution and is probably not a reliable metric for ovarian cancer epidemiology.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Singer G, Kurman RJ, Chang HW, Cho SK, Shih Ie M (2002) Diverse tumorigenic pathways in ovarian serous carcinoma. Am J Pathol 160(4):1223–1228 (Epub 2002/04/12)PubMedCrossRef
2.
ShihIe M, Kurman RJ (2004) Ovarian tumorigenesis: a proposed model based on morphological and molecular genetic analysis. Am J Pathol 164(5):1511–1518CrossRef
3.
Kurman RJ, Shih IM (2008) Pathogenesis of ovarian cancer: lessons from morphology and molecular biology and their clinical implications. Int J Gynecol Pathol 27:151–160PubMed
4.
Landen CN Jr, Birrer MJ, Sood AK (2008) Early events in the pathogenesis of epithelial ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 26(6):995–1005PubMedCrossRef
5.
Levanon K, Crum C, Drapkin R (2008) New insights into the pathogenesis of serous ovarian cancer and its clinical impact. J Clin Oncol 26(32):5284–5293PubMedCrossRef
6.
Kuo KT, Guan B, Feng Y, Mao TL, Chen X, Jinawath N et al (2009) Analysis of DNA copy number alterations in ovarian serous tumors identifies new molecular genetic changes in low-grade and high-grade carcinomas. Cancer Res 69(9):4036–4042PubMedCrossRef
7.
Grimley PM, Matsuno RK, Rosenberg PS, Henson DE, Schwartz AM, Anderson WF (2009) Qualitative age interactions between low and high grade serous ovarian carcinomas. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 18(8):2256–2261PubMedCrossRef
8.
Classification and staging of malignant tumors in the female pelvis, accepted by the General Assembly of FIGO in New York, April 12, 1970. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 50(1):1–7
9.
Silverberg SG (2000) Histopathologic grading of ovarian carcinoma: a review and proposal. Int J Gynecol Pathol 19(1):7–15PubMedCrossRef
10.
Shimizu Y, Kamoi S, Amada S, Akiyama F, Silverberg SG (1998) Toward the development of a universal grading system for ovarian epithelial carcinoma: testing of a proposed system in a series of 461 patients with uniform treatment and follow-up. Cancer 82(5):893–901PubMedCrossRef
11.
Shimizu Y, Kamoi S, Amada S, Hasumi K, Akiyama F, Silverberg SG (1998) Toward the development of a universal grading system for ovarian epithelial carcinoma. I. Prognostic significance of histopathologic features–problems involved in the architectural grading system. Gynecol Oncol 70(1):2–12PubMedCrossRef
12.
Malpica A (2008) Grading of ovarian cancer: a histotype-specific approach. Int J Gynecol Pathol 27:175–181PubMed
13.
Malpica A, Deavers MT, Tornos C, Kurman RJ, Soslow R, Seidman JD et al (2007) Interobserver and intraobserver variability of a two-tier system for grading ovarian serous carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 31(8):1168–1174PubMedCrossRef
14.
Malpica A, Deavers MT, Lu K, Bodurka DC, Atkinson EN, Gershenson DM et al (2004) Grading ovarian serous carcinoma using a two-tier system. Am J Surg Pathol 28(4):496–504PubMedCrossRef
15.
McCluggage WG (2011) Morphological subtypes of ovarian carcinoma: a review with emphasis on new developments and pathogenesis. Pathology (Phila) 43(5):420–432 (Epub 2011/07/01)CrossRef
16.
17.
Goodman MT, Hernandez BY, Hewitt S, Lynch CF, Cote TR, Frierson HF Jr et al (2005) Tissues from population-based cancer registries: a novel approach to increasing research potential. Hum Pathol 36(7):812–820PubMedCrossRef
18.
AJCC (2011) Ovary and primary peritoneal carcinoma. In: Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A (eds) AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th edn. Springer, New York, pp 419–428
19.
International Classification of Diseases for Oncology 3rd ed (2000) In: Fritz A, Percy C, Jack A, Shanmugaratnam K, Sobin L, Parkin DM, Whelan S (eds) U.S. Interim Version 2000. World Health Organization, Geneva
20.
Cohen CJ (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Measur 20:37–46CrossRef
21.
Kaplan EL, Meier P (1958) Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 53:457–481CrossRef
22.
Peto R, Peto J (1972) Asymptomatically efficient rank invariant test procedures. J Roy Stat Soc A 135((A)):185–198CrossRef
23.
Gilks CB, Ionescu DN, Kalloger SE, Kobel M, Irving J, Clarke B et al (2008) Tumor cell type can be reproducibly diagnosed and is of independent prognostic significance in patients with maximally debulked ovarian carcinoma. Hum Pathol 39(8):1239–1251PubMedCrossRef
24.
Sugiyama T, Kamura T, Kigawa J, Terakawa N, Kikuchi Y, Kita T et al (2000) Clinical characteristics of clear cell carcinoma of the ovary: a distinct histologic type with poor prognosis and resistance to platinum-based chemotherapy. Cancer 88(11):2584–2589 (Epub 2000/06/22)PubMedCrossRef
25.
Soslow RA (2008) Histologic subtypes of ovarian carcinoma: an overview. Int J Gynecol Pathol 27:161–174PubMed
26.
Cicchetti DV, Feinstein AR (1990) High agreement but low kappa: II. Resolving the paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 43(6):551–558 (Epub 1990/01/01)PubMedCrossRef
27.
Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV (1990) High agreement but low kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 43(6):543–549 (Epub 1990/01/01)PubMedCrossRef
28.
Last JM (1995) A dictionary of epidemiology, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
29.
Seidman JD, Yemelyanova A, Cosin JA, Smith A, Kurman RJ (2012) Survival rates for international federation of gynecology and obstetrics stage III ovarian carcinoma by cell type: a study of 262 unselected patients with uniform pathologic review. Int J Gynecol Cancer 22(3):367–371 (Epub 2012/01/13)PubMedCrossRef
30.
Kobel M, Kalloger SE, Boyd N, McKinney S, Mehl E, Palmer C et al (2008) Ovarian carcinoma subtypes are different diseases: implications for biomarker studies. PLoS Med 5(12):e232PubMedCrossRef
31.
Leitao MM Jr, Boyd J, Hummer A, Olvera N, Arroyo CD, Venkatraman E et al (2004) Clinicopathologic analysis of early-stage sporadic ovarian carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 28(2):147–159PubMedCrossRef
32.
Singer G, Shih Ie M, Truskinovsky A, Umudum H, Kurman RJ (2003) Mutational analysis of K-ras segregates ovarian serous carcinomas into two types: invasive MPSC (low-grade tumor) and conventional serous carcinoma (high-grade tumor). Int J Gynecol Pathol 22(1):37–41PubMedCrossRef
33.
Sotiriou C, Pusztai L (2009) Gene-expression signatures in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 360(8):790–800PubMedCrossRef
34.
Sotiriou C, Wirapati P, Loi S, Harris A, Fox S, Smeds J et al (2006) Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis. J Natl Cancer Inst 98(4):262–272PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Agreement for tumor grade of ovarian carcinoma: analysis of archival tissues from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results residual tissue repository
Authors
Rayna K. Matsuno
Mark E. Sherman
Kala Visvanathan
Marc T. Goodman
Brenda Y. Hernandez
Charles F. Lynch
Olga B. Ioffe
David Horio
Charles Platz
Sean F. Altekruse
Ruth M. Pfeiffer
William F. Anderson
Publication date
01-04-2013
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Cancer Causes & Control / Issue 4/2013
Print ISSN: 0957-5243
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7225
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-013-0157-5

Other articles of this Issue 4/2013

Cancer Causes & Control 4/2013 Go to the issue

Original paper

Statin use and risk of bladder cancer: a meta-analysis

Original paper

Childhood acute leukemia, maternal beverage intake during pregnancy, and metabolic polymorphisms

Letter to the editor

Racial/ethnic differences in serum sex steroid hormone concentrations in US adolescent males

Original paper

Carotenoid intake and risk of colorectal adenomas in a cohort of male health professionals

Original paper

Diet impacts mortality from cancer: results from the multiethnic cohort study

Original paper

Bleomycin-induced mutagen sensitivity, passive smoking, and risk of breast cancer in Chinese women: a case–control study
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits