1992
DOI: 10.1097/00000478-199212000-00001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interobserver Reproducibility in the Diagnosis of Ductal Proliferative Breast Lesions Using Standardized Criteria

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

3
181
1
8

Year Published

1996
1996
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 380 publications
(193 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
3
181
1
8
Order By: Relevance
“…In fact, the level of agreement we observed among eight pathologists in this study was higher than that seen in prior studies of observer agreement in proliferative breast lesions, even those in which standardized criteria were employed. 32 There are a number of potential limitations to this study. First, it could be argued that our results may not be representative of the level of agreement attainable in general pathology practice because all of the pathologists participating in this study have a particular interest in breast pathology.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In fact, the level of agreement we observed among eight pathologists in this study was higher than that seen in prior studies of observer agreement in proliferative breast lesions, even those in which standardized criteria were employed. 32 There are a number of potential limitations to this study. First, it could be argued that our results may not be representative of the level of agreement attainable in general pathology practice because all of the pathologists participating in this study have a particular interest in breast pathology.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…[28][29][30][31][32][33] One conclusion that can be drawn from these studies is that observer agreement is fostered by the use of standardized histologic criteria by the study participants. In keeping with this observation, the results of this study demonstrate for the first time that FEA, as defined by the WHO Working Group, can be distinguished from non-atypical CCLs with a high degree of consistency using available diagnostic criteria.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Usual and atypical ductal hyperplasias were classified using the criteria of Page, Schnitt and others, 24,25 and the columnar cell lesion spectrum classified using the criteria of Schnitt et al 24,26 Slides were reviewed to confirm histologic diagnosis and select lesions for genotyping. Where available, a spectrum of lesions was isolated from the same specimen, including proliferative lesions, atypical lesions, in situ, invasive, and/or metastatic carcinoma.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The diagnostic criteria for EHLA are those previously given for moderate or florid hyperplasia. 5,[13][14][15][16] We performed immunostaining using an affinity-purified mouse monoclonal antibody against ER␣ (6F-11; Zymed Laboratories, South San Francisco, CA) and the streptoavidin-biotin immunoperoxidase method. Immunohistochemical stains were evaluated in individual EHLA lesions and in at least 3 adjacent histologically normal ducts and lobular units without knowledge of subsequent cancer outcome.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%