Dataset Information

Significant Inter- and Intralaboratory Variation in Gleason Grading of Prostate Cancer: A Nationwide Study of 35,258 Patients in The Netherlands.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Our aim was to analyze grading variation between pathology laboratories and between pathologists within individual laboratories using nationwide real-life data.

Methods

We retrieved synoptic (n = 13,397) and narrative (n = 29,377) needle biopsy reports from the Dutch Pathology Registry and prostate-specific antigen values from The Netherlands Cancer Registration for prostate cancer patients diagnosed between January 2017 and December 2019. We determined laboratory-specific proportions per histologic grade and unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) for International Society of Urological Pathologists Grades 1 vs. 2-5 for 40 laboratories due to treatment implications for higher grades. Pathologist-specific proportions were determined for 21 laboratories that consented to this part of analysis. The synoptic reports of 21 laboratories were used for analysis of case-mix correction for PSA, age, year of diagnosis, number of biopsies and positive cores.

Results

A total of 38,321 reports of 35,258 patients were included. Grade 1 ranged between 19.7% and 44.3% per laboratory (national mean = 34.1%). Out of 40 laboratories, 22 (55%) reported a significantly deviant OR, ranging from 0.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-0.59) to 1.54 (CI 1.22-1.93). Case-mix correction was performed for 10,294 reports, altering the status of 3/21 (14%) laboratories, but increasing the observed variation (20.8% vs. 17.7%). Within 15/21 (71%) of laboratories, significant inter-pathologist variation existed.

Conclusion

Substantial variation in prostate cancer grading was observed between and within Dutch pathology laboratories. Case-mix correction did not explain the variation. Better standardization of prostate cancer grading is warranted to optimize and harmonize treatment.

SUBMITTER: Flach RN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8582481 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Despite revisions in 2005 and 2014, the Gleason prostate cancer (PCa) grading system still has major deficiencies. Combining of Gleason scores into a three-tiered grouping (6, 7, 8-10) is used most frequently for prognostic and therapeutic purposes. The lowest score, assigned 6, may be misunderstood as a cancer in the middle of the grading scale, and 3+4=7 and 4+3=7 are often considered the same prognostic group.To verify that a new grading system accurately produces a smaller number of grades with the most significant prognostic differences, using multi-institutional and multimodal therapy data.Between 2005 and 2014, 20,845 consecutive men were treated by radical prostatectomy at five academic institutions; 5501 men were treated with radiotherapy at two academic institutions.Outcome was based on biochemical recurrence (BCR). The log-rank test assessed univariable differences in BCR by Gleason score. Separate univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards used four possible categorizations of Gleason scores.In the surgery cohort, we found large differences in recurrence rates between both Gleason 3+4 versus 4+3 and Gleason 8 versus 9. The hazard ratios relative to Gleason score 6 were 1.9, 5.1, 8.0, and 11.7 for Gleason scores 3+4, 4+3, 8, and 9-10, respectively. These differences were attenuated in the radiotherapy cohort as a whole due to increased adjuvant or neoadjuvant hormones for patients with high-grade disease but were clearly seen in patients undergoing radiotherapy only. A five-grade group system had the highest prognostic discrimination for all cohorts on both univariable and multivariable analysis. The major limitation was the unavoidable use of prostate-specific antigen BCR as an end point as opposed to cancer-related death.The new PCa grading system has these benefits: more accurate grade stratification than current systems, simplified grading system of five grades, and lowest grade is 1, as opposed to 6, with the potential to reduce overtreatment of PCa.We looked at outcomes for prostate cancer (PCa) treated with radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy and validated a new grading system with more accurate grade stratification than current systems, including a simplified grading system of five grades and a lowest grade is 1, as opposed to 6, with the potential to reduce overtreatment of PCa.

Project description:Background and objectiveGleason grading system is currently the clinical gold standard for determining prostate cancer aggressiveness. Prostate cancer is typically classified into one of 5 different categories with 1 representing the most indolent disease and 5 reflecting the most aggressive disease. Grades 3 and 4 are the most common and difficult patterns to be discriminated in clinical practice. Even though the degree of gland differentiation is the strongest determinant of Gleason grade, manual grading is subjective and is hampered by substantial inter-reader disagreement, especially with regard to intermediate grade groups.MethodsTo capture the topological characteristics and the degree of connectivity between nuclei around the gland, the concept of Homology Profile (HP) for prostate cancer grading is presented in this paper. HP is an algebraic tool, whereby, certain algebraic invariants are computed based on the structure of a topological space. We utilized the Statistical Representation of Homology Profile (SRHP) features to quantify the extent of glandular differentiation. The quantitative characteristics which represent the image patch are fed into a supervised classifier model for discrimination of grade patterns 3 and 4.ResultsOn the basis of the novel homology profile, we evaluated 43 digitized images of prostate biopsy slides annotated for regions corresponding to Grades 3 and 4. The quantitative patch-level evaluation results showed that our approach achieved an Area Under Curve (AUC) of 0.96 and an accuracy of 0.89 in terms of discriminating Grade 3 and 4 patches. Our approach was found to be superior to comparative methods including handcrafted cellular features, Stacked Sparse Autoencoder (SSAE) algorithm and end-to-end supervised learning method (DLGg). Also, slide-level quantitative and qualitative evaluation results reflect the ability of our approach in discriminating Gleason Grade 3 from 4 patterns on H&E tissue images.ConclusionsWe presented a novel Statistical Representation of Homology Profile (SRHP) approach for automated Gleason grading on prostate biopsy slides. The most discriminating topological descriptions of cancerous regions for grade 3 and 4 in prostate cancer were identified. Moreover, these characteristics of homology profile are interpretable, visually meaningful and highly consistent with the rubric employed by pathologists for the task of Gleason grading.