Problems in the reproducibility of classification of small lung adenocarcinoma: an international interobserver study

Abstract

Aims The 2015 WHO classification for lung adenocarcinoma (ACA) provides criteria for adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS), minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA) and invasive adenocarcinoma (INV), but differentiating these entities can be difficult. As our understanding of prognostic significance increases, inconsistent classification is problematic. This study assesses agreement within an international panel of lung pathologists and identifies factors contributing to inconsistent classification. Methods and results Sixty slides of small lung ACAs were reviewed digitally by six lung pathologists in three rounds, with consensus conferences and examination of elastic stains in round 3. The panel independently reviewed each case to assess final diagnosis, invasive component size and predominant pattern. The kappa value for AIS and MIA versus INV decreased from 0.44 (round 1) to 0.30 and 0.34 (rounds 2 and 3). Interobserver agreement for invasion (AIS versus other) decreased from 0.34 (round 1) to 0.29 and 0.29 (rounds 2 and 3). The range of the measured invasive component in a single case was up to 19.2 mm among observers. Agreement was excellent in tumours with high‐grade cytology and fair with low‐grade cytology. Conclusions Interobserver agreement in small lung ACAs was fair to moderate, and improved minimally with elastic stains. Poor agreement is primarily attributable to subjectivity in pattern recognition, but high‐grade cytology increases agreement. More reliable methods to differentiate histological patterns may be necessary, including refinement of the definitions as well as recognition of other features (such as high‐grade cytology) as a formal part of routine assessment.

A Grading System for Invasive Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma: A Proposal From the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Pathology Committee

“…Thus, refinement of definitions of lepidic and invasive patterns will likely improve reproducibility. 42 In summary, this study proposes a new grading system for invasive pulmonary adenocarcinoma. The grading model is practical and based on pattern recognition, which allows its quick implementation in routine pathology practice, as it does not require the pathologist to learn additional technologies.…”

8th Edition Tumor, Node, and Metastasis T-Stage Prognosis Discrepancies: Solid Component Diameter Predicts Prognosis Better than Invasive Component Diameter

“…This is because the concordance rate for the pathological diagnosis of lung adenocarcinoma, especially for invasion, is known to be low, even among pulmonary pathologists [ 3 , 4 ]. Six pulmonary pathologists digitally reviewed 60 slides of small lung adenocarcinoma in three rounds, and interobserver agreement was fair to moderate; the range of the measured invasive component in a single case was up to 19.2 mm among observers [ 15 ]. Generally speaking, the prognostic significance of pathological invasive size and solid component diameter is thought to be important for adenocarcinoma with GGO, but it is not the only adenocarcinoma.…”

A narrative review of digital pathology and artificial intelligence: focusing on lung cancer

“…Similarly, in the case of lung cancer, judgement of small cell carcinoma vs. non-small cell carcinoma is known for its high concordance among pathologists. However, when examining the histological subtypes, the interobserver agreement rate is low even among the authorities (72,73).…”