Role of immunohistochemistry for interobserver agreement of Peritoneal Regression Grading Score in peritoneal metastasis

Sönke Detlefsen*, Tobias Windedal, Frédéric Bibeau, Lærke Valsøe Bruhn, Norman Carr, Martin Graversen, Katharina Markowski, Michael Bau Mortensen, Daniel Neureiter, Christine Sempoux, Wiebke Solass, Malene Theilmann Thinesen, Claus Fristrup

*Kontaktforfatter

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

34 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC)–directed therapy is a new treatment option for peritoneal metastasis (PM). The 4-tiered Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS) has been proposed for assessment of histological treatment response. We aimed to evaluate the effect of immunohistochemistry (IHC) on interobserver agreement of the PRGS. Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)–stained and IHC-stained slides (n = 662) from 331 peritoneal quadrant biopsies (QBs) taken prior to 99 PIPAC procedures performed on 33 patients were digitalized and uploaded to a web library. Eight raters (five consultants and three residents) assessed the PRGS, and Krippendorff's alpha coefficients (α) were calculated. Results (IHC-PRGS) were compared with data published in 2019, using H&E-stained slides only (H&E-PRGS). Overall, agreement for IHC-PRGS was substantial to almost perfect. Agreement (all raters) regarding single QBs after treatment was substantial for IHC-PRGS (α = 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66–0.72) and moderate for H&E-PRGS (α = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.56–0.64). Agreement (all raters) regarding the mean PRGS per QB set after treatment was higher for IHC-PRGS (α = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.73–0.83) than for H&E-PRGS (α = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.64–0.78). Among residents, agreement was almost perfect for IHC-PRGS and substantial for H&E-PRGS. Agreement (all raters) regarding maximum PRGS per QB set after treatment was substantial for IHC-PRGS (α = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.54–0.68) and moderate for H&E-PRGS (α = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.53–0.66). Among residents, agreement was substantial for IHC-PRGS (α = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.57–0.75) and moderate for H&E-PRGS (α = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.45–0.64). Additional IHC seems to improve the interobserver agreement of PRGS, particularly between less experienced raters.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftHuman Pathology
Vol/bind120
Sider (fra-til)77-87
ISSN0046-8177
DOI
StatusUdgivet - feb. 2022

Bibliografisk note

Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Fingeraftryk

Dyk ned i forskningsemnerne om 'Role of immunohistochemistry for interobserver agreement of Peritoneal Regression Grading Score in peritoneal metastasis'. Sammen danner de et unikt fingeraftryk.

Citationsformater