Display options
Cite
Wei BR, Halsey CH, Hoover SB, et al. Agreement in Histological Assessment of Mitotic Activity Between Microscopy and Digital Whole Slide Images Informs Conversion for Clinical Diagnosis. Acad Pathol. 2019;6:2374289519859841doi: 10.1177/2374289519859841.
Wei, B. R., Halsey, C. H., Hoover, S. B., Puri, M., Yang, H. H., Gallas, B. D., Lee, M. P., Chen, W., Durham, A. C., Dwyer, J. E., Sánchez, M. D., Traslavina, R. P., Frank, C., Bradley, C., McGill, L. D., Esplin, D. G., Schaffer, P. A., Cramer, S. D., Lyle, L. T., Beck, J., Buza, E., Gong, Q., Hewitt, S. M., & Simpson, R. M. (2019). Agreement in Histological Assessment of Mitotic Activity Between Microscopy and Digital Whole Slide Images Informs Conversion for Clinical Diagnosis. Academic pathology, 62374289519859841. https://doi.org/10.1177/2374289519859841
Wei, Bih-Rong, et al. "Agreement in Histological Assessment of Mitotic Activity Between Microscopy and Digital Whole Slide Images Informs Conversion for Clinical Diagnosis." Academic pathology vol. 6 (2019): 2374289519859841. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/2374289519859841
Wei BR, Halsey CH, Hoover SB, Puri M, Yang HH, Gallas BD, Lee MP, Chen W, Durham AC, Dwyer JE, Sánchez MD, Traslavina RP, Frank C, Bradley C, McGill LD, Esplin DG, Schaffer PA, Cramer SD, Lyle LT, Beck J, Buza E, Gong Q, Hewitt SM, Simpson RM. Agreement in Histological Assessment of Mitotic Activity Between Microscopy and Digital Whole Slide Images Informs Conversion for Clinical Diagnosis. Acad Pathol. 2019 Jul 11;6:2374289519859841. doi: 10.1177/2374289519859841. eCollection 2019. PMID: 31321298; PMCID: PMC6628521.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Acad Pathol. 2019 Jul 11;6:2374289519859841. doi: 10.1177/2374289519859841. eCollection 2019.

Agreement in Histological Assessment of Mitotic Activity Between Microscopy and Digital Whole Slide Images Informs Conversion for Clinical Diagnosis.

Academic pathology

Bih-Rong Wei, Charles H Halsey, Shelley B Hoover, Munish Puri, Howard H Yang, Brandon D Gallas, Maxwell P Lee, Weijie Chen, Amy C Durham, Jennifer E Dwyer, Melissa D Sánchez, Ryan P Traslavina, Chad Frank, Charles Bradley, Lawrence D McGill, D Glen Esplin, Paula A Schaffer, Sarah D Cramer, L Tiffany Lyle, Jessica Beck, Elizabeth Buza, Qi Gong, Stephen M Hewitt, R Mark Simpson

Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Cancer Biology and Genetics, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
  2. Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick, MD, USA.
  3. Division of Imaging, Diagnostics, and Software Reliability, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
  4. Department of Pathobiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  5. Section of Infections of the Nervous System, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
  6. Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Pathology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
  7. Animal Reference Pathology, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
  8. Cancer and Inflammation Program, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
  9. Women's Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
  10. Laboratory of Human Carcinogenesis, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
  11. Laboratory of Pathology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.

PMID: 31321298 PMCID: PMC6628521 DOI: 10.1177/2374289519859841

Abstract

Validating digital pathology as substitute for conventional microscopy in diagnosis remains a priority to assure effectiveness. Intermodality concordance studies typically focus on achieving the same diagnosis by digital display of whole slide images and conventional microscopy. Assessment of discrete histological features in whole slide images, such as mitotic figures, has not been thoroughly evaluated in diagnostic practice. To further gauge the interchangeability of conventional microscopy with digital display for primary diagnosis, 12 pathologists examined 113 canine naturally occurring mucosal melanomas exhibiting a wide range of mitotic activity. Design reflected diverse diagnostic settings and investigated independent location, interpretation, and enumeration of mitotic figures. Intermodality agreement was assessed employing conventional microscopy (CM40×), and whole slide image specimens scanned at 20× (WSI20×) and at 40× (WSI40×) objective magnifications. An aggregate 1647 mitotic figure count observations were available from conventional microscopy and whole slide images for comparison. The intraobserver concordance rate of paired observations was 0.785 to 0.801; interobserver rate was 0.784 to 0.794. Correlation coefficients between the 2 digital modes, and as compared to conventional microscopy, were similar and suggest noninferiority among modalities, including whole slide image acquired at lower 20× resolution. As mitotic figure counts serve for prognostic grading of several tumor types, including melanoma, 6 of 8 pathologists retrospectively predicted survival prognosis using whole slide images, compared to 9 of 10 by conventional microscopy, a first evaluation of whole slide image for mitotic figure prognostic grading. This study demonstrated agreement of replicate reads obtained across conventional microscopy and whole slide images. Hence, quantifying mitotic figures served as surrogate histological feature with which to further credential the interchangeability of whole slide images for primary diagnosis.

Keywords: cancer grading; digital pathology; informatics; prognosis; reproducibility study; technology adoption; training; validation

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

  1. Cancer. 2003 Mar 15;97(6):1488-98 - PubMed
  2. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006 Oct;130(10):1448-53 - PubMed
  3. Anal Quant Cytol Histol. 2008 Feb;30(1):47-52 - PubMed
  4. J Clin Monit Comput. 2008 Aug;22(4):257-9 - PubMed
  5. Hum Pathol. 2010 Dec;41(12):1770-6 - PubMed
  6. Hum Pathol. 2011 Jan;42(1):68-74 - PubMed
  7. Vet Pathol. 2011 Jan;48(1):54-72 - PubMed
  8. Hum Pathol. 2012 May;43(5):702-7 - PubMed
  9. J Cutan Pathol. 2012 Mar;39(3):324-30 - PubMed
  10. Diagn Pathol. 2012 Jun 20;7:42 - PubMed
  11. J Digit Imaging. 2012 Dec;25(6):738-43 - PubMed
  12. Hum Pathol. 2012 Oct;43(10):1739-44 - PubMed
  13. Acad Radiol. 2012 Dec;19(12):1508-17 - PubMed
  14. Hum Pathol. 2013 May;44(5):888-94 - PubMed
  15. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013 Dec;137(12):1710-22 - PubMed
  16. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013 Dec;137(12):1733-9 - PubMed
  17. Pigment Cell Melanoma Res. 2014 Jan;27(1):90-102 - PubMed
  18. Pigment Cell Melanoma Res. 2014 Jan;27(1):37-47 - PubMed
  19. PLoS One. 2013 Dec 30;8(12):e82576 - PubMed
  20. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014 May;138(5):658-63 - PubMed
  21. Brain Pathol. 2015 May;25(3):266-75 - PubMed
  22. Pathol Res Pract. 2014 Nov;210(11):713-8 - PubMed
  23. Oncol Rep. 2014 Dec;32(6):2735-43 - PubMed
  24. Am J Surg Pathol. 2015 Jan;39(1):13-24 - PubMed
  25. Anal Cell Pathol (Amst). 2014;2014:157308 - PubMed
  26. Toxicol Pathol. 2015 Dec;43(8):1149-57 - PubMed
  27. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2017 Jan;141(1):151-161 - PubMed
  28. Biomed Eng Online. 2017 Feb 16;16(1):28 - PubMed
  29. Histopathology. 2018 Mar;72(4):662-671 - PubMed
  30. Am J Surg Pathol. 2018 Jan;42(1):39-52 - PubMed
  31. Am J Clin Pathol. 2018 Jan 29;149(2):181-185 - PubMed
  32. Int J Mol Sci. 2018 Jan 30;19(2):null - PubMed
  33. World J Urol. 2018 Apr;36(4):549-555 - PubMed
  34. Vet Pathol. 2018 Jul;55(4):490-500 - PubMed
  35. J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2018 Jul;5(3):031410 - PubMed
  36. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018 Aug;25(8):2105-2110 - PubMed
  37. J Pathol Inform. 2019 Feb 07;10:4 - PubMed

Publication Types