BIOMAT Database Logo BIOMAT Database Logo

Interobserver variability in cytologic subclassification of squamous intraepithelial lesions--the Bethesda System vs. World Health Organization classification. 2006

Marija Pajtler, and Silvana Audy-Jurković, and Valerija Milicić-Juhas, and Blazenka Staklenac, and Biljana Pauzar
Department of Clinical Cytology, University Hospital Osijek, Osijek, Croatia. pajtler.marija@kbo.hr

The aim of the study was to compare interobserver variability for The Bethesda System (TBS) and World Health Organization (WHO) classification of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions. A total of 1,000 conventional Papanicolaou smears (156 positive and 884 negative) were examined "blindly" by three cytologists and one cytotechnician. The degree of observer agreement was expressed by kappa statistics using a program for the calculation of interobserver variation and association "Agree" (Svanholm and Jergensen, 1989). Kappa (kappa) was determined for each cytologic diagnosis within a particular classification and total for either classification. The association with and separation from other diagnoses was determined for each cytologic diagnosis in the form of conditional probability (P(j)). In WHO classification, the diagnoses of dysplasia media and dysplasia gravis showed poor reproducibility (kappa = 0.114 and kappa = 0.259, respectively), the diagnosis of dysplasia levis good reproducibility (kappa = 0.639), and the diagnosis of carcinoma in situ excellent reproducibility (kappa = 0.762). WHO classification yielded pool kappa of 0.741. In TBS classification, the diagnosis of LSIL showed good, and HSIL excellent reproducibility (kappa = 0.542 and kappa = 0.763, respectively). TBS classification yielded pool kappa of 0.699. Dysplasia media (P(j) = 0.121) and dysplasia gravis (P(j) = 0.274) were found to be morphologically poorly defined, and carcinoma in situ (P(j) = 0.777) and dysplasia levis (P(j) = 0.651) well defined diagnoses. LSIL was morphologically moderately defined (P(j) = 0.587) and HSIL well defined (P(j) = 0.789) diagnosis. Accordingly, TBS does not substantially improve diagnostic reproducibility of the cytologic diagnoses of squamous intraepithelial lesions, while providing considerably less information to the clinician than the four-grade dysplasia/CIS terminology, thus eliminating the opportunity of choosing a different procedure for the diagnosis of dysplasia media, which is of utmost importance in the population of young nulliparae.

UI MeSH Term Description Entries
D002278 Carcinoma in Situ A lesion with cytological characteristics associated with invasive carcinoma but the tumor cells are confined to the epithelium of origin, without invasion of the basement membrane. Carcinoma, Intraepithelial,Carcinoma, Preinvasive,Intraepithelial Neoplasms,Neoplasms, Intraepithelial,Intraepithelial Carcinoma,Intraepithelial Neoplasm,Neoplasm, Intraepithelial,Preinvasive Carcinoma
D002583 Uterine Cervical Neoplasms Tumors or cancer of the UTERINE CERVIX. Cancer of Cervix,Cancer of the Cervix,Cancer of the Uterine Cervix,Cervical Cancer,Cervical Neoplasms,Cervix Cancer,Cervix Neoplasms,Neoplasms, Cervical,Neoplasms, Cervix,Uterine Cervical Cancer,Cancer, Cervical,Cancer, Cervix,Cancer, Uterine Cervical,Cervical Cancer, Uterine,Cervical Cancers,Cervical Neoplasm,Cervical Neoplasm, Uterine,Cervix Neoplasm,Neoplasm, Cervix,Neoplasm, Uterine Cervical,Uterine Cervical Cancers,Uterine Cervical Neoplasm
D003584 Cytological Techniques Methods used to study CELLS. Cytologic Technics,Cytological Technic,Cytological Technics,Cytological Technique,Technic, Cytological,Technics, Cytological,Technique, Cytological,Techniques, Cytological,Cytologic Technic,Technic, Cytologic,Technics, Cytologic
D005260 Female Females
D006801 Humans Members of the species Homo sapiens. Homo sapiens,Man (Taxonomy),Human,Man, Modern,Modern Man
D015203 Reproducibility of Results The statistical reproducibility of measurements (often in a clinical context), including the testing of instrumentation or techniques to obtain reproducible results. The concept includes reproducibility of physiological measurements, which may be used to develop rules to assess probability or prognosis, or response to a stimulus; reproducibility of occurrence of a condition; and reproducibility of experimental results. Reliability and Validity,Reliability of Result,Reproducibility Of Result,Reproducibility of Finding,Validity of Result,Validity of Results,Face Validity,Reliability (Epidemiology),Reliability of Results,Reproducibility of Findings,Test-Retest Reliability,Validity (Epidemiology),Finding Reproducibilities,Finding Reproducibility,Of Result, Reproducibility,Of Results, Reproducibility,Reliabilities, Test-Retest,Reliability, Test-Retest,Result Reliabilities,Result Reliability,Result Validities,Result Validity,Result, Reproducibility Of,Results, Reproducibility Of,Test Retest Reliability,Validity and Reliability,Validity, Face
D015588 Observer Variation The failure by the observer to measure or identify a phenomenon accurately, which results in an error. Sources for this may be due to the observer's missing an abnormality, or to faulty technique resulting in incorrect test measurement, or to misinterpretation of the data. Two varieties are inter-observer variation (the amount observers vary from one another when reporting on the same material) and intra-observer variation (the amount one observer varies between observations when reporting more than once on the same material). Bias, Observer,Interobserver Variation,Intraobserver Variation,Observer Bias,Inter-Observer Variability,Inter-Observer Variation,Interobserver Variability,Intra-Observer Variability,Intra-Observer Variation,Intraobserver Variability,Inter Observer Variability,Inter Observer Variation,Inter-Observer Variabilities,Inter-Observer Variations,Interobserver Variabilities,Interobserver Variations,Intra Observer Variability,Intra Observer Variation,Intra-Observer Variabilities,Intra-Observer Variations,Intraobserver Variabilities,Intraobserver Variations,Observer Variations,Variabilities, Inter-Observer,Variabilities, Interobserver,Variabilities, Intra-Observer,Variabilities, Intraobserver,Variability, Inter-Observer,Variability, Interobserver,Variability, Intra-Observer,Variability, Intraobserver,Variation, Inter-Observer,Variation, Interobserver,Variation, Intra-Observer,Variation, Intraobserver,Variation, Observer,Variations, Inter-Observer,Variations, Interobserver,Variations, Intra-Observer,Variations, Intraobserver,Variations, Observer

Related Publications

Marija Pajtler, and Silvana Audy-Jurković, and Valerija Milicić-Juhas, and Blazenka Staklenac, and Biljana Pauzar
The Bethesda classification for squamous intraepithelial lesions: histologic, cytologic, and viral correlates.
March 1992, Obstetrics and gynecology,
Marija Pajtler, and Silvana Audy-Jurković, and Valerija Milicić-Juhas, and Blazenka Staklenac, and Biljana Pauzar
Interobserver variability in subclassification of squamous intraepithelial lesions: Results of the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology.
November 1999, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine,
Marija Pajtler, and Silvana Audy-Jurković, and Valerija Milicić-Juhas, and Blazenka Staklenac, and Biljana Pauzar
Diagnosing Anal Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions With and Without p16: An Interobserver Variability Study.
January 2020, Journal of lower genital tract disease,
Marija Pajtler, and Silvana Audy-Jurković, and Valerija Milicić-Juhas, and Blazenka Staklenac, and Biljana Pauzar
Cytologic observations preceding high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions.
January 1995, Acta cytologica,
Marija Pajtler, and Silvana Audy-Jurković, and Valerija Milicić-Juhas, and Blazenka Staklenac, and Biljana Pauzar
Reproducibility of subclassification of squamous intraepithelial lesions: conventional versus ThinPrep paps.
July 2003, Journal of lower genital tract disease,
Marija Pajtler, and Silvana Audy-Jurković, and Valerija Milicić-Juhas, and Blazenka Staklenac, and Biljana Pauzar
Validation of the Newly Proposed World Health Organization Classification System for Conjunctival Melanocytic Intraepithelial Lesions: A Comparison with the C-MIN and PAM Classification Schemes.
March 2021, American journal of ophthalmology,
Marija Pajtler, and Silvana Audy-Jurković, and Valerija Milicić-Juhas, and Blazenka Staklenac, and Biljana Pauzar
Low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions: cytologic predictors of biopsy confirmation.
January 1994, Diagnostic cytopathology,
Marija Pajtler, and Silvana Audy-Jurković, and Valerija Milicić-Juhas, and Blazenka Staklenac, and Biljana Pauzar
Interobserver variability in the interpretation of brush cytologic studies from head and neck lesions.
December 1991, Archives of otolaryngology--head & neck surgery,
Marija Pajtler, and Silvana Audy-Jurković, and Valerija Milicić-Juhas, and Blazenka Staklenac, and Biljana Pauzar
Squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL: LSIL, HSIL, ASCUS, ASC-H, LSIL-H) of Uterine Cervix and Bethesda System.
January 2021, CytoJournal,
Marija Pajtler, and Silvana Audy-Jurković, and Valerija Milicić-Juhas, and Blazenka Staklenac, and Biljana Pauzar
Inaccuracy of cytologic diagnosis in high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (CIN 3).
January 1995, Acta cytologica,
Copied contents to your clipboard!