Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=22245958
&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 229.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 263.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\22245958
.jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117 Am+J+Surg+Pathol
2012 ; 36
(3
): 443-53
Nephropedia Template TP
gab.com Text
Twit Text FOAVip
Twit Text #
English Wikipedia
Diagnostic reproducibility of hydatidiform moles: ancillary techniques (p57
immunohistochemistry and molecular genotyping) improve morphologic diagnosis
#MMPMID22245958
Vang R
; Gupta M
; Wu LS
; Yemelyanova AV
; Kurman RJ
; Murphy KM
; Descipio C
; Ronnett BM
Am J Surg Pathol
2012[Mar]; 36
(3
): 443-53
PMID22245958
show ga
Distinction of hydatidiform moles (HMs) from nonmolar specimens (NMs) and
subclassification of HMs as complete hydatidiform moles (CHMs) and partial
hydatidiform moles (PHMs) are important for clinical practice and investigational
studies; yet, diagnosis based solely on morphology is affected by interobserver
variability. Molecular genotyping can distinguish these entities by discerning
androgenetic diploidy, diandric triploidy, and biparental diploidy to diagnose
CHMs, PHMs, and NMs, respectively. Eighty genotyped cases (27 CHMs, 27 PHMs, and
26 NMs) were selected from a series of 200 potentially molar specimens previously
diagnosed using p57 immunostaining and genotyping. Cases were classified by 3
gynecologic pathologists on the basis of H&E slides (masked to p57 immunostaining
and genotyping results) into 1 of 3 categories (CHM, PHM, or NM) during 2
diagnostic rounds; a third round incorporating p57 immunostaining results was
also conducted. Consensus diagnoses (those rendered by 2 of 3 pathologists) were
determined. Genotyping results were used as the gold standard for assessing
diagnostic performance. Sensitivity of a diagnosis of CHM ranged from 59% to 100%
for individual pathologists and from 70% to 81% by consensus; specificity ranged
from 91% to 96% for individuals and from 94% to 98% by consensus. Sensitivity of
a diagnosis of PHM ranged from 56% to 93% for individual pathologists and from
70% to 78% by consensus; specificity ranged from 58% to 92% for individuals and
from 74% to 85% by consensus. The percentage of correct classification of all
cases by morphology ranged from 55% to 75% for individual pathologists and from
70% to 75% by consensus. The ? values for interobserver agreement ranged from
0.59 to 0.73 (moderate to good) for a diagnosis of CHM, from 0.15 to 0.43 (poor
to moderate) for PHM, and from 0.13 to 0.42 (poor to moderate) for NM. The ?
values for intraobserver agreement ranged from 0.44 to 0.67 (moderate to good).
Addition of the p57 immunostain improved sensitivity of a diagnosis of CHM to a
range of 93% to 96% for individual pathologists and 96% by consensus; specificity
was improved from a range of 96% to 98% for individual pathologists and 96% by
consensus; there was no substantial impact on diagnosis of PHMs and NMs.
Interobserver agreement for interpretation of the p57 immunostain was 0.96
(almost perfect). Even with morphologic assessment by gynecologic pathologists
and p57 immunohistochemistry, 20% to 30% of cases will be misclassified, and, in
particular, distinction of PHMs and NMs will remain problematic.