TY - JOUR
T1 - Interlaboratory reproducibility of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance
T2 - A national survey
AU - Confortini, M.
AU - Di Bonito, L.
AU - Carozzi, F.
AU - Ghiringhello, B.
AU - Montanari, G.
AU - Parisio, F.
AU - Prandi, S.
AU - Navone, Roberto
AU - Pilotti, Silvana
AU - Alasio, Loredana
AU - Prandi, Sonia
AU - Cariaggi, Maria Paola
AU - Taddei, Gianluigi
AU - Gentili, Cesare
AU - Passamonti, Basilio
AU - Bucciarelli, Emilio
AU - Di Giacomo, Carlo
AU - Pellegrini, Antonella
AU - Schiboni, M. Luisa
AU - Di Bonito, Maurizio
AU - Quarto, Ferdinando
AU - Botti, Gerardo
AU - De Falco, M. Luisa
AU - Di Bonito, Luigi
AU - Simone, Gianni
AU - Wiesel, Sarah
AU - Tucci, Luigi
AU - Bustinto, Teresa
AU - Ientile, Domenico
AU - Rais, Marco
AU - Scalisi, Aurora
AU - Grasso, Giuseppe
AU - Dalla Palma, Paolo
AU - Minucci, Daria
AU - Ninfo, Vito
AU - Vettorazzi, Marcello
PY - 2006/12
Y1 - 2006/12
N2 - Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the inter-laboratory reproducibility for atypical glandular cells (AGC) (The Bethesda System (TBS) 2001) of the laboratories involved in the screening programmes in Italy. Methods: A set of 35 selected slides were circulated among 167 laboratories involved in local population-based cervical screening programmes. Each laboratory provided one single diagnosis per smear. The smears were read blind to the original diagnosis and to the diagnoses provided by other laboratories. A 'majority' diagnosis was defined for each case and assumed as the reference standard. The diagnosis provided from each laboratory was compared with the majority diagnosis. Results: According to the majority report the 35 slides in the set were classified as negative in nine cases, AGC in eight, adenocarcinoma in eight, and squamous lesion or squamous + glandular lesion in 10. The crude agreement between all pairs of laboratories was 49.43%. K-values were 0.46, 0.21, 0.34, 0.36 and 0.32 for negative, AGC/AIS (adenocarcinoma in situ of endocervix), AdenoCa, Sq/Sq + Gl and all reporting categories respectively. Concordance according to overall K was moderate to substantial in 77% of the participating laboratories. Conclusions: The present study shows that the AGC category is not easily reproducible. The data confirmed the importance, in a screening scenario, of AGC/AIS diagnoses, but also presented difficulties in differentiating between the two diagnoses. In addition to the results obtained from the circulation of the slides, laboratories which had annually a low number of cervical smears were able to gain experience focused on particular morphological pictures.
AB - Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the inter-laboratory reproducibility for atypical glandular cells (AGC) (The Bethesda System (TBS) 2001) of the laboratories involved in the screening programmes in Italy. Methods: A set of 35 selected slides were circulated among 167 laboratories involved in local population-based cervical screening programmes. Each laboratory provided one single diagnosis per smear. The smears were read blind to the original diagnosis and to the diagnoses provided by other laboratories. A 'majority' diagnosis was defined for each case and assumed as the reference standard. The diagnosis provided from each laboratory was compared with the majority diagnosis. Results: According to the majority report the 35 slides in the set were classified as negative in nine cases, AGC in eight, adenocarcinoma in eight, and squamous lesion or squamous + glandular lesion in 10. The crude agreement between all pairs of laboratories was 49.43%. K-values were 0.46, 0.21, 0.34, 0.36 and 0.32 for negative, AGC/AIS (adenocarcinoma in situ of endocervix), AdenoCa, Sq/Sq + Gl and all reporting categories respectively. Concordance according to overall K was moderate to substantial in 77% of the participating laboratories. Conclusions: The present study shows that the AGC category is not easily reproducible. The data confirmed the importance, in a screening scenario, of AGC/AIS diagnoses, but also presented difficulties in differentiating between the two diagnoses. In addition to the results obtained from the circulation of the slides, laboratories which had annually a low number of cervical smears were able to gain experience focused on particular morphological pictures.
KW - AGC
KW - Cervical adenocarcinoma
KW - Cervical screening
KW - Cytodiagnosis
KW - Cytological techniques
KW - Cytology
KW - Diagnosis
KW - Glandular lesions
KW - Laboratory diagnosis
KW - Reproducibility
KW - Screening
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33751315027&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33751315027&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2006.00372.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2006.00372.x
M3 - Article
C2 - 17168918
AN - SCOPUS:33751315027
VL - 17
SP - 353
EP - 360
JO - Cytopathology
JF - Cytopathology
SN - 0956-5507
IS - 6
ER -