PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Jasenka P Matisic

Publications and source records attributed to Jasenka P Matisic.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Kappa statistics to measure interrater and intrarater agreement for 1790 cervical biopsy specimens among twelve pathologists: qualitative histopathologic analysis and methodologic issues.

BACKGROUND: As part of a program project to evaluate emerging optical technologies for cervical neoplasia, we performed fluorescence and reflectance spectroscopic examinations of patients with abnormal Papanicolaou smears. Biopsy specimens were taken from each area and measured optically, and study pathologists performed qualitative histopathologic readings. Several methodologic issues arose in this analysis: (1) the interpathologist and intrapathologist agreement between institutions for the 1790 biopsy specimens; (2) the interinstitutional agreement among the two institutions conducting the trials on 117 randomly chosen biopsy specimens; (3) the interinstitutional agreement among the two institutions and a third expert gynecologic pathologist to ensure the expert readings were comparable to those outside both institutions on 117 randomly chosen biopsy specimens; and (4) an additional three reviews of the 106 difficult biopsy specimens by all three institutions. METHODS: All 1790 specimens from 850 patients were reviewed three times at each institution in blinded fashion; those for which the first and second reviews were identical were not reviewed a third time. A randomly selected sample of 117 specimens was randomly ordered and read by study pathologists at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, British Columbia Cancer Agency (BCCA), and Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH). The 106 difficult cases were treated in the same manner as the randomized and random-ordered cases. Generalized, unweighted, and weighted kappas and their 95% confidence intervals were used to assess agreement. Binary comparisons were used to compare diagnostic categories. FINDINGS: The kappas for the three readings of the overall data set using eight-category World Health Organization (WHO) criteria were as follows: 0.66 for the generalized, 0.72 for weighted, and ranged from 0.59 to 0.94 unweighted binary categories; those read using four-category Bethesda criteria: 0.70 for generalized, 0.69 for weighted, and 0.56-0.94 for unweighted binary categories. For the pool versus the study pathologist readings, the eight-category kappa was 0.51 for generalized, 0.72 for weighted, and 0.56-0.82 for unweighted binary categories; for those read using Bethesda criteria: 0.70 for generalized, 0.70 for weighted, and 0.59-0.82 for the unweighted binary categories. The interpathologist and intrapathologist readings were fair by Landis standards at the low end of the diagnostic scale (atypia, human papillomavirus, and CIN1) and substantial to almost perfect at the high end (CIN2, CIN3, and CIS). The randomly selected and randomly ordered sample of 117 specimens read with the WHO system yielded a generalized kappa of 0.45; among the three institutions (M. D. Anderson Cancer Center vs. BCCA, M. D. Anderson vs. BWH, and BCCA vs. BWH), the unweighted kappas were 0.46, 0.41, and 0.49 and the weighted were 0.65, 0.66, and 0.68, respectively; for the Bethesda, a generalized kappa of 0.65, unweighted kappas of 0.66, 0.65, and 0.47, and weighted of 0.74, 0.72, and 0.74. The difficult specimens read with the WHO system yielded a generalized kappa of 0.23; among the three institutions the unweighted kappas were 0.20, 0.30, and 0.37, and the weighted were 0.17, 0.34, and 0.31; for the Bethesda, a generalized kappa of 0.25; among the three institutions, the unweighted kappas were 0.21, 0.32, and 0.37, and the weighted were: 0.07, 0.21, and 0.37, respectively. INTERPRETATION: Kappas in this expert group of pathologists were in the moderate, substantial, and almost perfect ranges for the overall and randomized samples. The randomized sample was representative of the larger sample. The kappa of the specimens for which disagreements arose was, predictably, in the slight range. Our findings will aid both the correlations with optical measurements using fluorescence and reflectance spectroscopy and the quantitative histopathologic analysis of these study specimens.

Biopsy↗

The quality of community colposcopic practice.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the quality of community colposcopic practice in British Columbia through an assessment of the degree of correlation between colposcopy, cytology, and histology. METHOD: We reviewed all new-patient colposcopies in British Columbia during 2001 by 37 gynecologists in 24 hospital-based clinics. RESULTS: Colposcopic impression closely mirrored the referral cytology diagnosis in 89.8% of cases. As with cytology-biopsy comparisons, discordant cases were more likely to be overestimates of disease rather than underestimates, 18.8% versus 1.8%. Overestimates were usually biopsy sampling errors rather than false positive cytology. The overall correlation between cytology and biopsy was considered satisfactory in 79.4% of cases. Satisfactory agreement between the colposcopic diagnosis and accompanying biopsies occurred in 86.8% of patients. Five colposcopists had performance scores below this standard. Colposcopy with a sensitivity of 90.3% and a specificity of 57.3% as practiced in this provincial program would appear to be of a satisfactory level. The rate of intraepithelial or invasive disease increased from 40.6% in patients with low-grade squamous intraepithelial changes to 91.9% in patients with suspicious or malignant cytology. The value of the colposcopic impression to identify disease correlated best with the higher the grade of disease predicted (64.6% to 92.6%). CONCLUSION: A measure of the colposcopic proficiency in the community can be estimated by comparing the level of agreement between the presenting cytology, colposcopic impression, and corresponding directed biopsies. The results of this study would indicate that 5 individuals had practice standards that were below average. An integrated cytology-colposcopy program facilitates the assessment and identification of below-average practice standards in a community.

Adult↗

Cervical cleaning improves Pap smear quality.

BACKGROUND: Cervical Papanicolaou (Pap) smear screening is an effective method of detecting cytological changes in the cervix before they lead to cervical cancer. However, the quality of a Pap smear can be compromised by inflammatory exudate, inadequate cellularity or failure to sample the transformation zone. We evaluated the effect of routine cervical cleaning on Pap smear quality. METHODS: In a primary care setting, we compared the quality of Pap smears obtained after cervical cleaning (with a dry, oversized cotton swab) with the quality of historical control slides obtained from the same women without prior cervical cleaning. The results for both groups were then compared with statistical averages for the province of British Columbia. RESULTS: Inflammatory exudate was reported in 1 (0.3%) of the 334 study smears and 72 (11.0%) of the 652 control smears (p < 0.001). Inadequate endocervical or metaplastic squamous cells were reported in 11 (3.3%) of the study smears and 90 (13.8%) of the control smears (p < 0.001). Inadequate cellularity was reported in 13 (3.9%) of the study smears and 9 (1.4%) of the control smears (p = 0.01). There were similar statistical differences between the study group and provincial averages. The results for the control group did not differ significantly from provincial averages (inflammatory exudate, 11.3%; inadequate endocervical cells, 14.7%; and poor cellularity, 2.7%). INTERPRETATION: Prior cervical cleaning with an oversized cotton swab was associated with a lower frequency of smears with inflammatory exudate or inadequate endocervical cells and, to a lesser degree, a higher frequency of smears with inadequate cellularity.

Adult↗