The diagnosis of ovarian cancer by pathologists: How often do diagnoses by contributing pathologists agree with a panel of gynecologic pathologists?

Carl W. Tyler, Nancy C. Lee, Stanley J. Robboy, Robert J. Kurman, Allen L. Paris, Phyllis A. Wingo, G. David Williamson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The Cancer and Steroid Hormone Study, a multicenter, population-based, case-control study of ovarian, breast, and endometrial cancer in women 20 to 54 years of age, permitted the diagnoses of contributing pathologists to be compared with those of a panel of three gynecologic pathologists. A diagnosis of ovarian cancer was made by contributing pathologists on 477 subjects. Agreement between the two groups of pathologists was 97% for primary epithelial ovarian cancer and 89% for primary nonepithelial ovarian malignancies. Agreement on diagnosis of major cellular subtypes of ovarian malignancy ranged between 73% for endometrioid cancer and 100% for clear cell carcinomas. We conclude that the diagnosis of pathologic features of primary ovarian cancer is highly predictable. Nonetheless, diagnosis by histologic type varies sufficiently that a review process should be considered for clinical or investigative decisions involving specific histologic diagnoses of ovarian cancer.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)65-70
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology
Volume164
Issue number1 PART 1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1991

Keywords

  • Ovarian neoplasms
  • diagnosis
  • pathology
  • predictive value of tests

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The diagnosis of ovarian cancer by pathologists: How often do diagnoses by contributing pathologists agree with a panel of gynecologic pathologists?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this