Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 3, 2026

Enhancing Prostate Tumor Biobanking Reliability with Improved Sampling Technique and Histological Characterization
07:34

Enhancing Prostate Tumor Biobanking Reliability with Improved Sampling Technique and Histological Characterization

Published on: November 17, 2023

Error rates in reporting prostatic core biopsies.

Jon D Oxley1, Chandan Sen

  • 1Department of Cellular Pathology, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK. jon.oxley@nbt.nhs.uk

Histopathology
|March 29, 2011
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

DNMT1 mRNA transfer via macrophage-derived extracellular vesicles following LPS exposure regulates TNFα gene methylation.

Shock (Augusta, Ga.)·2025
Same author

Microvesicle-Mediated Transfer of DNA Methyltransferase Proteins Results in Recipient Cell Immunosuppression.

The Journal of surgical research·2022
Same author

Errors in prostate core biopsy diagnosis in an era of specialisation and double reporting.

Journal of clinical pathology·2020
Same author

Ferric Chloride-induced Canine Carotid Artery Thrombosis: A Large Animal Model of Vascular Injury.

Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE·2018
Same author

Contemporary prostate biopsy reporting: insights from a survey of clinicians' use of pathology data.

Journal of clinical pathology·2018
Same author

High grade prostatic adenocarcinoma with a partly intraductal growth pattern producing a mimic of urothelial carcinoma in situ.

Journal of clinical pathology·2012
Same journal

TROP2 immunoreactivity in pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma.

Histopathology·2026
Same journal

Malignant adenomyoepithelioma of the breast: seven cases illustrating morphological diversity and diagnostic challenges.

Histopathology·2026
Same journal

A CRX-positive RB1-deficient bone tumour with a retinoblastoma-like DNA methylation profile.

Histopathology·2026
Same journal

Perivascular epithelioid cell tumours of the genitourinary tract: clinicopathological features and molecular landscape.

Histopathology·2026
Same journal

Navigating diagnostic challenges in low-grade spindle cell lesions of the breast: a retrospective review.

Histopathology·2026
Same journal

Neoplastic transformation of sporadic gastric hyperplastic polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis of risk factors and clinicopathological features.

Histopathology·2026
See all related articles

Prostate biopsy error rates show false negatives (1.7%) are higher than false positives (0.5%), particularly in screening cases. Pathologist expertise influences accuracy, but errors persist even among specialists.

Area of Science:

  • Uropathology
  • Histopathology
  • Medical Diagnostics

Background:

  • Accurate interpretation of prostate biopsies is crucial for timely cancer diagnosis and patient management.
  • Understanding error rates in histopathological reporting is essential for quality improvement initiatives.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To quantify and compare false-negative and false-positive error rates in prostate biopsy interpretations.
  • To assess these error rates in both screening and non-screening patient populations.
  • To evaluate the impact of pathologist specialization on diagnostic accuracy.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of 4192 prostate biopsies over a 6-year period.
  • Involved 15 consultant histopathologists, including two specialists in uropathology.

More Related Videos

Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Biopsy Data to Guide Sampling Procedures for Prostate Cancer Biobanking
05:49

Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Biopsy Data to Guide Sampling Procedures for Prostate Cancer Biobanking

Published on: October 10, 2019

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 3, 2026

Enhancing Prostate Tumor Biobanking Reliability with Improved Sampling Technique and Histological Characterization
07:34

Enhancing Prostate Tumor Biobanking Reliability with Improved Sampling Technique and Histological Characterization

Published on: November 17, 2023

Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Biopsy Data to Guide Sampling Procedures for Prostate Cancer Biobanking
05:49

Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Biopsy Data to Guide Sampling Procedures for Prostate Cancer Biobanking

Published on: October 10, 2019

  • Biopsies were reviewed prior to multidisciplinary team meetings.

    • Main Results:

    • Overall false-negative rate was 1.7% (screening 2.1%, non-screening 1.5%).
    • Overall false-positive rate was 0.5% (screening 0.9%, non-screening 0.4%).
    • Error rates varied significantly among pathologists, with false-negative rates from 0% to 9.3% and false-positive rates from 0% to 3.8%.

    Conclusions:

    • The false-negative rate was three times higher than the false-positive rate.
    • Higher error rates were observed in the screening population compared to the non-screening group.
    • While non-specialists made more errors, specialists also committed false-negative errors, indicating that specialization alone does not eliminate diagnostic inaccuracies.