Epidemiological evaluation of concordance between initial diagnosis and central pathology review in a comprehensive and prospective series of sarcoma patients in the Rhone-Alpes region

Antoine Lurkin, Francoise Ducimetière, Dominique Ranchère Vince, Anne-Valérie Decouvelaere, Dominic Cellier, François N Gilly, Dimitri Salameire, Pierre Biron, Guy de Laroche, Jean Yves Blay, Isabelle Ray-Coquard, Antoine Lurkin, Francoise Ducimetière, Dominique Ranchère Vince, Anne-Valérie Decouvelaere, Dominic Cellier, François N Gilly, Dimitri Salameire, Pierre Biron, Guy de Laroche, Jean Yves Blay, Isabelle Ray-Coquard

Abstract

Background: Sarcomas are rare malignant tumors. Accurate initial histological diagnosis is essential for adequate management. We prospectively assessed the medical management of all patients diagnosed with sarcoma in a European region over a one-year period to identify the quantity of first diagnosis compared to central expert review (CER).

Methods: Histological data of all patients diagnosed with sarcoma in Rhone-Alpes between March 2005 and Feb 2006 were collected. Primary diagnoses were systematically compared with second opinion from regional and national experts.

Results: Of 448 patients included, 366 (82%) matched the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Of these, 199 (54%) had full concordance between primary diagnosis and second opinion (the first pathologist and the expert reached identical conclusions), 97 (27%) had partial concordance (identical diagnosis of conjonctive tumor but different grade or subtype), and 70 (19%) had complete discordance (different histological type or invalidation of the diagnosis of sarcoma). The major discrepancies were related to histological grade (n = 68, 19%), histological type (n = 39, 11%), subtype (n = 17, 5%), and grade plus subtype or grade plus histological type (n = 43, 12%).

Conclusions: Over 45% of first histological diagnoses were modified at second reading, possibly resulting in different treatment decisions. Systematic second expert opinion improves the quality of diagnosis and possibly the management of patients.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Patient selection.

References

    1. Menegoz F, Black RJ, Arveux P, Magne V, Ferlay J, Buemi A. Cancer incidence and mortality in France in 1975-95. Eur J Cancer Prev. 1997;6(5):442–66.
    1. Clark MA, Fisher C, Judson I, Thomas JM. Soft-tissue sarcomas in adults. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(7):701–11. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra041866.
    1. Ray-Coquard I, Thiesse P, Ranchere-Vince D, Chauvin F, Bobin JY, Sunyach MP. Conformity to clinical practice guidelines, multidisciplinary management and outcome of treatment for soft tissue sarcomas. Ann Oncol. 2004;15(2):307–15. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdh058.
    1. Fletcher CD, Unni KK, Mertens F. Tumors of Soft Tissue and Bone. IARC press; 2002. WHO classification of tumors. Pathology and genetics.
    1. Casali PG, Jost L, Sleijfer S, Verweij J, Blay JY. Soft tissue sarcomas: ESMO clinical recommendations for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(Suppl 2):ii89–ii93. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdn101.
    1. Arbiser ZK, Folpe AL, Weiss SW. Consultative (expert) second opinions in soft tissue pathology. Analysis of problem-prone diagnostic situations. Am J Clin Pathol. 2001;116(4):473–6. doi: 10.1309/425H-NW4W-XC9A-005H.
    1. Coindre JM, Nguyen BB, Goussot JF, De MI, Maree D, De Mascarel A. [Histological changes after chemotherapy of soft tissue sarcomas in the adult] Ann Pathol. 1985;5(2):95–9.
    1. Coindre JM, Trojani M, Contesso G, David M, Rouesse J, Bui NB. Reproducibility of a histopathologic grading system for adult soft tissue sarcoma. Cancer. 1986;58(2):306–9. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19860715)58:2<306::AID-CNCR2820580216>;2-7.
    1. Harris M, Hartley AL, Blair V, Birch JM, Banerjee SS, Freemont AJ. Sarcomas in north west England: I. Histopathological peer review. Br J Cancer. 1991;64(2):315–20.
    1. Katenkamp D. Cellular heterogeneity. Explanation for changing of tumor phenotype and biologic behavior in soft tissue sarcomas. Pathol Res Pract. 1988;183(6):698–705.
    1. Tomaszewski JE, Bear HD, Connally JA, Epstein JI, Feldman M, Foucar K. Consensus conference on second opinions in diagnostic anatomic pathology. Who, What, and When. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000;114(3):329–35.
    1. Lind AC, Bewtra C, Healy JC, Sims KL. Prospective peer review in surgical pathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 1995;104(5):560–6.
    1. Kronz JD, Westra WH, Epstein JI. Mandatory second opinion surgical pathology at a large referral hospital. Cancer. 1999;86(11):2426–35. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19991201)86:11<2426::AID-CNCR34>;2-3.
    1. Ducimetiere A, Lurkin D, Ranchere-Vince P, Biron M, Peoch L, Istier D, Salameire P, Chalabreysse J, Blay Y, Ray-Coquard I. Exhaustive prospective collection of new sarcomas: Report of an unexpectedly high incidence. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2007 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings (Post-Meeting Edition) 2007;25(No 18S (June 20 Supplement)):20513.
    1. Berger C, Trombert-Paviot B, Mitton N, Frappaz D, Galambrun C, Plantaz D. [Childhood cancer incidence and survival rates in the Rhone-Alpes regional paediatric registry 1987-1999] Arch Pediatr. 2006;13(2):121–9. doi: 10.1016/j.arcped.2005.10.022.
    1. Freycon F, Trombert-Paviot B, Casagranda L, Bertrand Y, Plantaz D, Marec-Berard P. Trends in treatment-related deaths (TRDs) in childhood cancer and leukemia over time: a follow-up of patients included in the childhood cancer registry of the Rhone-Alpes region in France (ARCERRA) Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2008;50(6):1213–20. doi: 10.1002/pbc.21506.
    1. Guillou L, Coindre JM, Bonichon F, Nguyen BB, Terrier P, Collin F. Comparative study of the National Cancer Institute and French Federation of Cancer Centers Sarcoma Group grading systems in a population of 410 adult patients with soft tissue sarcoma. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15(1):350–62.
    1. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960;20:27–46. doi: 10.1177/001316446002000104.
    1. Fleiss JL, Cohen J, Everitt BS. Large sample standard errors of kappa and weighted kappa. Psychol Bull. 1969;72:323–327. doi: 10.1037/h0028106.
    1. Singer S, Corson JM, Demetri GD, Healey EA, Marcus K, Eberlein TJ. Prognostic factors predictive of survival for truncal and retroperitoneal soft-tissue sarcoma. Ann Surg. 1995;221(2):185–95. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199502000-00009.
    1. Singer S, Baldini EH, Demetri GD, Fletcher JA, Corson JM. Synovial sarcoma: prognostic significance of tumor size, margin of resection, and mitotic activity for survival. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14(4):1201–8.
    1. Enzinger FM. Soft tissue tumours. 4. Weiss SW. St Louis: Mosby; 2001.
    1. Reichardt P. High-dose chemotherapy in adult soft tissue sarcoma. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2002;41(2):157–67. doi: 10.1016/S1040-8428(01)00153-6.
    1. Coindre JM. [Recommendations for anatamo-pathologic management of soft tissue sarcomas in the adult. Pathologists of the FNCLCC Sarcoma Group (Federation Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer)] Ann Pathol. 1998;18(6):505–11.
    1. Coindre JM. Histologic grading of adult soft tissue sarcomas. Verh Dtsch Ges Pathol. 1998;82:59–63.
    1. Hasegawa T, Yamamoto S, Nojima T, Hirose T, Nikaido T, Yamashiro K. Validity and reproducibility of histologic diagnosis and grading for adult soft-tissue sarcomas. Hum Pathol. 2002;33(1):111–5. doi: 10.1053/hupa.2002.30184.
    1. Lehnhardt M, Daigeler A, Hauser J, Puls A, Soimaru C, Kuhnen C. The value of expert second opinion in diagnosis of soft tissue sarcomas. J Surg Oncol. 2008;97(1):40–3. doi: 10.1002/jso.20897.
    1. Bridge JA, Sandberg AA. Cytogenetic and molecular genetic techniques as adjunctive approaches in the diagnosis of bone and soft tissue tumors. Skeletal Radiol. 2000;29(5):249–58. doi: 10.1007/s002560050603.
    1. Coindre JM. Immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of soft tissue tumours. Histopathology. 2003;43(1):1–16. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2559.2003.01639.x.
    1. Ladanyi M, Bridge JA. Contribution of molecular genetic data to the classification of sarcomas. Hum Pathol. 2000;31(5):532–8. doi: 10.1053/hp.2000.6706.
    1. Ordóñez NG. Application of immunocytochemistry in the diagnosis of soft tissue sarcomas: a review and update. Adv Anat Pathol. 1998;5:67–85. doi: 10.1097/00125480-199801000-00051.
    1. Yamaguchi U, Hasegawa T. [Pathological evaluation of soft tissue sarcoma for diagnosis, prognosis and treatment] Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 2004;31(9):1340–5.
    1. Meis-Kindblom JM, Bjerkehage B, Bohling T, Domanski H, Halvorsen TB, Larsson O. Morphologic review of 1000 soft tissue sarcomas from the Scandinavian Sarcoma Group (SSG) Register. The peer-review committee experience. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl. 1999;285:18–26.
    1. Presant CA, Russell WO, Alexander RW, Fu YS. Soft-tissue and bone sarcoma histopathology peer review: the frequency of disagreement in diagnosis and the need for second pathology opinions. The Southeastern Cancer Study Group experience. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4(11):1658–61.
    1. Randall RL, Bruckner JD, Papenhausen MD, Thurman T, Conrad EU III. Errors in diagnosis and margin determination of soft-tissue sarcomas initially treated at non-tertiary centers. Orthopedics. 2004;27(2):209–12.
    1. Shiraki M, Enterline HT, Brooks JJ, Cooper NS, Hirschl S, Roth JA. Pathologic analysis of advanced adult soft tissue sarcomas, bone sarcomas, and mesotheliomas. The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) experience. Cancer. 1989;64(2):484–90. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19890715)64:2<484::AID-CNCR2820640223>;2-T.
    1. Westra WH, Kronz JD, Eisele DW. The impact of second opinion surgical pathology on the practice of head and neck surgery: a decade experience at a large referral hospital. Head Neck. 2002;24(7):684–93. doi: 10.1002/hed.10105.
    1. Matasar MJ, Shi W, Silberstien J. Expert second opinion pathology review of lymphoma in the Era of the world health organization classification. Blood. 2007.
    1. Piver MS, Tsukada Y, Werness BA, Dicioccio RA, Whittemore AS, Ponder BA. Comparative study of ovarian cancer histopathology by registry pathologists and referral pathologists: a study by the Gilda Radner Familial Ovarian Cancer Registry. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;78(2):166–70. doi: 10.1006/gyno.2000.5840.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi