• Türkçe
    • English
  • English 
    • Türkçe
    • English
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Avesis
  • Dokümanı Olmayanlar
  • Makale
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Avesis
  • Dokümanı Olmayanlar
  • Makale
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Histologic Classification and Molecular Signature of Polymorphous Adenocarcinoma (PAC) and Cribriform Adenocarcinoma of Salivary Gland (CASG) An International Interobserver Study

Date
2020
Author
Di Palma, Silvana
Reis-Filho, Jorge S.
Scognamiglio, Theresa
Sebastiao, Ana P. M.
Seethala, Raja R.
Skalova, Alena
Smith, Stephen M.
Thompson, Lester D. R.
Wasseman, Jason K.
Wenig, Bruce M.
Weinreb, Ilan
Katabi, Nora
Tekkesin, Merva
Xu, Bin
Barbieri, Andrea L.
Bishop, Justin A.
Chiosea, Simon
Dogan, Snjezana
Faquin, William C.
Ghossein, Ronald
Hyrcza, Martin
Jo, Vickie Y.
Lewis, James S.
Lozada, John R.
Michal, Michal
Pareja, Fresia G.
Perez-Ordonez, Bayardo
Prasad, Manju L.
Purgina, Bibianna
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
Polymorphous adenocarcinoma (PAC) shows histologic diversity with streaming and targetoid features whereas cribriform adenocarcinoma of salivary gland (CASG) demonstrates predominantly cribriform and solid patterns with glomeruloid structures and optically clear nuclei. Opinions diverge on whether CASG represents a separate entity or a variant of PAC. We aimed to assess the level of agreement among 25 expert Head and Neck pathologists in classifying these tumors. Digital slides of 48 cases were reviewed and classified as: PAC, CASG, tumors with >= 50% of papillary architecture (PAP), and tumors with indeterminate features (IND). The consensus diagnoses were correlated with a previously reported molecular alteration. The consensus diagnoses were PAC in 18/48, CASG in16/48, PAP in 3/48, and IND in 11/48. There was a fair interobserver agreement in classifying the tumors (kappa=0.370). The full consensus was achieved in 3 (6%) cases, all of which were classified as PAC. A moderate agreement was reached for PAC (kappa=0.504) and PAP (kappa=0.561), and a fair agreement was reached for CASG (kappa=0.390). IND had only slight diagnostic concordance (kappa=0.091). PAC predominantly harbored PRKD1 hotspot mutation, whereas CASG was associated with fusion involving PRKD1, PRKD2, or PRKD3. However, such molecular events were not exclusive as 7% of PAC had fusion and 13% of CASG had mutation. In conclusion, a fair to moderate interobserver agreement can be achieved in classifying PAC and CASG. However, a subset (23%) showed indeterminate features and was difficult to place along the morphologic spectrum of PAC/CASG among expert pathologists. This may explain the controversy in classifying these tumors.
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12627/5510
https://doi.org/10.1097/pas.0000000000001431
Collections
  • Makale [92796]

Creative Commons Lisansı

İstanbul Üniversitesi Akademik Arşiv Sistemi (ilgili içerikte aksi belirtilmediği sürece) Creative Commons Alıntı-GayriTicari-Türetilemez 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
Theme by 
Atmire NV
 

 


Hakkımızda
Açık Erişim PolitikasıVeri Giriş Rehberleriİletişim
sherpa/romeo
Dergi Adı/ISSN || Yayıncı

Exact phrase only All keywords Any

BaşlıkbaşlayaniçerenISSN

Browse

All of DSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypesThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsTypes

My Account

LoginRegister

Creative Commons Lisansı

İstanbul Üniversitesi Akademik Arşiv Sistemi (ilgili içerikte aksi belirtilmediği sürece) Creative Commons Alıntı-GayriTicari-Türetilemez 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
Theme by 
Atmire NV