» Articles » PMID: 31852770

Histopathologist Features Predictive of Diagnostic Concordance at Expert Level Among a Large International Sample of Pathologists Diagnosing Barrett's Dysplasia Using Digital Pathology

Overview
Journal Gut
Specialty Gastroenterology
Date 2019 Dec 20
PMID 31852770
Citations 23
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: Guidelines mandate expert pathology review of Barrett's oesophagus (BO) biopsies that reveal dysplasia, but there are no evidence-based standards to corroborate expert reviewer status. We investigated BO concordance rates and pathologist features predictive of diagnostic discordance.

Design: Pathologists (n=51) from over 20 countries assessed 55 digitised BO biopsies from across the diagnostic spectrum, before and after viewing matched p53 labelling. Extensive demographic and clinical experience data were obtained via online questionnaire. Reference diagnoses were obtained from a review panel (n=4) of experienced Barrett's pathologists.

Results: We recorded over 6000 case diagnoses with matched demographic data. Of 2805 H&E diagnoses, we found excellent concordance (>70%) for non-dysplastic BO and high-grade dysplasia, and intermediate concordance for low-grade dysplasia (42%) and indefinite for dysplasia (23%). Major diagnostic errors were found in 248 diagnoses (8.8%), which reduced to 232 (8.3%) after viewing p53 labelled slides. Demographic variables correlating with diagnostic proficiency were analysed in multivariate analysis, which revealed that at least 5 years of professional experience was protective against major diagnostic error for H&E slide review (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.74). Working in a non-teaching hospital was associated with increased odds of major diagnostic error (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.69); however, this was neutralised when pathologists viewed p53 labelled slides. Notably, neither case volume nor self-identifying as an expert predicted diagnostic proficiency. Extrapolating our data to real-world case prevalence suggests that 92.3% of major diagnostic errors are due to overinterpreting non-dysplastic BO.

Conclusion: Our data provide evidence-based criteria for diagnostic proficiency in Barrett's histopathology.

Citing Articles

Unraveling the pathogenesis of Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma: the "omics" era.

Barchi A, DellAnna G, Massimino L, Mandarino F, Vespa E, Viale E Front Oncol. 2025; 14:1458138.

PMID: 39950103 PMC: 11821489. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1458138.


The Aberrant Expression of Biomarkers and Risk Prediction for Neoplastic Changes in Barrett's Esophagus-Dysplasia.

Choi Y, Bedford A, Pollack S Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(13).

PMID: 39001449 PMC: 11240336. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16132386.


Histopathological Assessment of the Endoscopic Resection Specimen.

Sterlacci W, Vieth M Visc Med. 2024; 40(3):150-155.

PMID: 38873627 PMC: 11166902. DOI: 10.1159/000538318.


Adjunctive Use of Wide-Area Transepithelial Sampling-3D in Patients With Symptomatic Gastroesophageal Reflux Increases Detection of Barrett's Esophagus and Dysplasia.

Shaheen N, Odze R, Singer M, Salyers W, Srinivasan S, Kaul V Am J Gastroenterol. 2024; 119(10):1990-2001.

PMID: 38635377 PMC: 11446526. DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000002818.


Dedicated service for Barrett's oesophagus surveillance endoscopy yields higher dysplasia detection and guideline adherence in a non-tertiary setting in the UK: a 5-year comparative cohort study.

Ratcliffe E, Britton J, Yalamanchili H, Rostami I, Nadir S, Korani M Frontline Gastroenterol. 2024; 15(1):21-27.

PMID: 38487558 PMC: 10935534. DOI: 10.1136/flgastro-2023-102425.