Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 3, 2026
11:34
Building Up a High-throughput Screening Platform to Assess the Heterogeneity of HER2 Gene Amplification in Breast Cancers
Published on: December 5, 2017
12.1K
Understanding diagnostic variability in breast pathology: lessons learned from an expert consensus review panel
Kimberly H Allison1, Lisa M Reisch, Patricia A Carney
1Department of Pathology, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA.
Histopathology
|February 12, 2014
Summary
Diagnostic variability in breast pathology can be reduced by addressing pathologist opinions, standardizing reporting with electronic forms, and commenting on specimen quality. Consensus conferences aid in achieving accurate diagnoses.
Area of Science:
- Pathology
- Oncology
- Medical Diagnostics
Background:
- Diagnostic variability in interpreting breast specimens can impact patient care.
- The B-PATH study aimed to identify root causes of this variability.
Purpose of the Study:
- To understand the reasons behind diagnostic variability in breast specimen interpretation.
- To develop strategies for reducing diagnostic discrepancies.
Main Methods:
- A panel of three experienced breast pathologists reviewed 336 cases.
- Consensus meetings were held for diagnostically discordant cases.
- Qualitative analysis of 16 hours of consensus meeting transcripts for 201 cases.
Main Results:
- Diagnostic variability stemmed from pathologist-related factors (differing opinions on criteria, especially atypia), diagnostic coding/methodology issues (leading to the BPATH-Dx electronic form), and specimen-related factors (artifacts, poor quality).
- Consensus was reached for all cases after review and discussion.
Conclusions:
- Consensus conferences are effective in resolving diagnostic disagreements.
- Standardized electronic reporting formats (like BPATH-Dx) can minimize coding-related variability.
- Addressing suboptimal specimen quality is crucial for reducing diagnostic errors.
