Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 18, 2026
Author Spotlight: Advancing Prostate Cancer Research Through Improved Tissue Sampling and Biobanking
Published on: November 17, 2023
Impact of the Pathologist on Prostate Biopsy Diagnosis and Immunohistochemical Stain Usage Within a Single
Mit D Shah1, Anil V Parwani1, Debra L Zynger1
1Department of Pathology, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus.
Objectives:
To determine whether pathologists in a tertiary care institution vary in diagnosis and immunohistochemical stain usage in prostate biopsy specimens.
Methods:
Men who underwent prostate needle biopsies between 2008 and 2013 were included.
Results:
In total, 1,777 prostate biopsy specimens diagnosed by nine pathologists showed variation in diagnostic reporting (atypical small acinar proliferation, 2.0%-8.0%; high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, 2.0%-8.5%; nonneoplastic, 30.2%-48.3%; adenocarcinoma, 46.2%-55.3%; P < .001). Variation in Gleason scoring was observed (P < .001), with the 4 + 3 = 7 category having the greatest variability (6.9%-30.3%). A blinded review from the most outlying pathologist in this category revealed 45% grading discrepancies. The mean number of immunostains performed per case (0.3-1.2) differed between pathologists (P < .001), and one pathologist used immunostains at twice the rate of the remaining cohort.
Conclusions:
Case pathologist significantly affects prostate biopsy diagnosis and immunohistochemical workup. We recommend evaluation for outlying practice patterns to provide consistent and efficient patient care.
More Related Videos
08:40Quantitation of Protein Expression and Co-localization Using Multiplexed Immuno-histochemical Staining and Multispectral Imaging
Published on: April 8, 2016
05:33Introduction of an Integrated Pathology Image Management, Artificial Intelligence, and Reporting System
Published on: July 11, 2025