Experts and Gold Standards in Dermatopathology
- 1 October 1998
- journal article
- abstracts
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in The American Journal of Dermatopathology
- Vol. 20 (5) , 478-482
- https://doi.org/10.1097/00000372-199810000-00009
Abstract
The diagnosis of lymphoproliferative and melanocytic skin lesions is one of the most vexing problems in dermatopathology, a problem that is compounded by the far-reaching therapeutic and psychosocial consequences of the diagnosis for both patient and physician. On the occasion of a self-assessment slide seminar held during a dermatopathology meeting, 30 unusual lymphoproliferative and melanocytic lesions, each provided with four differential diagnoses, were evaluated by "expert pathologists" and other participants ("nonexperts") of the slide seminar. The final diagnosis was pinpointed by the majority of the experts in 16 of 30 cases (56%). The group of experts returned an unanimous decision on the diagnosis in only 2 of the 30 cases (7%). In contrast to the expert group, the preferred diagnoses given by the nonexperts showed a wider range. In 20 of 30 cases (66%), the final diagnosis could only be established after consideration of clinical, histologic, immunophenotypic, and molecular features. Our findings agree with the results of recent studies indicating quite a high degree of discordance among expert pathologists. The discordance between experts and, to a higher extent, nonexperts may have some crucial consequences for dermatopathology. Full agreement on diagnosis, particularly in unusual skin lesions, cannot be achieved only by an accumulation of expertises. Instead of relying on one single finding or diagnostic procedure ("gold standard") as the main criterion upon which to base a diagnosis, the diagnoses become more reliable if based on the integration of several factors including an evaluation of clinical and histomorphologic features and immunophenotypic and molecular findings ("diagnostic elements"), particularly in the field of lymphoproliferative and melanocytic lesions. In addition, a continuous retrospective work-up of difficult or unusual cases is recommended to ensure a long-term improvement in diagnostic reliability.Keywords
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Interdependence of Dermatopathology and Basic ScienceThe American Journal of Dermatopathology, 1997
- Diagnostic discrepancies and their clinical impact in a neuropathology referral practiceCancer, 1997
- Discordance among expert pathologists in diagnosis of melanocytic neoplasmsHuman Pathology, 1996
- Discordance in the histopathologic diagnosis of melanoma and melanocytic nevi between expert pathologistsPublished by Elsevier ,1996
- Recent developments in the therapy of localized and systemic sclerosisClinics in Dermatology, 1994
- Interrater and Intrarater Variabilities in the Evaluation of Cutaneous Lymphoproliferative T-Cell InfiltratesDermatologic Clinics, 1994
- Guttate Parapsoriasis/Digitate Dermatosis (Small Plaque Parapsoriasis) Is Mycosis FungoidesThe American Journal of Dermatopathology, 1992
- Critique of Definitions About Melanocytic Proliferations Formulated by an N.I.H. PanelThe American Journal of Dermatopathology, 1992
- Early MelanomaThe American Journal of Dermatopathology, 1991
- Differentiation Between Malignant B‐Cell Lymphomas and Pseudolymphomas of the SkinThe Journal of Dermatologic Surgery and Oncology, 1984