AI Article Synopsis

  • - The study aims to improve the diagnosis and understanding of serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC), a precursor to high-grade serous carcinoma, through a structured three-round Delphi study with 34 international gynecologic pathologists.
  • - An expert panel rated a list of diagnostic statements on their agreement, resulting in 64 statements, 27 of which reached consensus after three rounds to cover various aspects of STIC diagnosis, including processing, microscopy, and interpretation.
  • - The final consensus statements, approved by 85% of the experts, provide guidance for pathologists and aim to enhance the consistency of STIC diagnoses in clinical practice.

Article Abstract

Aim: Reliably diagnosing or safely excluding serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC), a precursor lesion of tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC), is crucial for individual patient care, for better understanding the oncogenesis of HGSC, and for safely investigating novel strategies to prevent tubo-ovarian carcinoma. To optimize STIC diagnosis and increase its reproducibility, we set up a three-round Delphi study.

Methods And Results: In round 1, an international expert panel of 34 gynecologic pathologists, from 11 countries, was assembled to provide input regarding STIC diagnosis, which was used to develop a set of statements. In round 2, the panel rated their level of agreement with those statements on a 9-point Likert scale. In round 3, statements without previous consensus were rated again by the panel while anonymously disclosing the responses of the other panel members. Finally, each expert was asked to approve or disapprove the complete set of consensus statements. The panel indicated their level of agreement with 64 statements. A total of 27 statements (42%) reached consensus after three rounds. These statements reflect the entire diagnostic work-up for pathologists, regarding processing and macroscopy (three statements); microscopy (eight statements); immunohistochemistry (nine statements); interpretation and reporting (four statements); and miscellaneous (three statements). The final set of consensus statements was approved by 85%.

Conclusion: This study provides an overview of current clinical practice regarding STIC diagnosis amongst expert gynecopathologists. The experts' consensus statements form the basis for a set of recommendations, which may help towards more consistent STIC diagnosis.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/his.14902DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

stic diagnosis
16
statements
14
consensus statements
12
serous tubal
8
tubal intraepithelial
8
intraepithelial carcinoma
8
level agreement
8
agreement statements
8
set consensus
8
three statements
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!