Inter-pathologist Agreement on Structured Histopathology Reporting in Chronic Rhinosinusitis

Histopathologic features of biologic therapy nonresponders in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis

BACKGROUND

Biologics are effective for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) by reducing type 2 inflammation. Nonresponders often require functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) and represent a challenging population potentially due to non-type 2 pathophysiology. This study characterizes the histopathologic features of biologic nonresponders.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 257 CRSwNP patients undergoing FESS was conducted. The biologic nonresponder group included patients with prior biologic therapy who exhibited persistent symptoms and polyp burden. Those with CRSwNP not prescribed biologic therapy were selected as controls. Demographics, comorbidities, and structured histopathology consisting of 13 variables were collected.

RESULTS

Of 257 CRSwNP patients, 20 were on biologics prior to FESS. Fourteen patients (70.0%) received dupilumab, one (5.0%) received mepolizumab, one (5.0%) received omalizumab, and four (20.0%) tried multiple biologics. The mean age for the biologic nonresponder group was 45.8 years compared to 50.4 years for the controls. Nonresponders had a significantly increased incidence of reduced tissue eosinophilia, defined as <5 per high power field (55% vs. 31.2%, p = 0.044) and increased basement membrane thickening (100% vs. 78.1%, p = 0.019). The remaining 11 variables did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Histopathologic analysis of biologic nonresponders demonstrates decreased eosinophilia and thickened basement membranes. These findings, particularly low tissue eosinophils, are consistent with a non-type 2 CRSwNP that may be recalcitrant to biologic therapies. Histopathologic analysis done in conjunction with FESS may aid clinicians in understanding response to biologic therapies in patients with CRSwNP who have persistent symptom burden necessitating FESS.

Reproducibility and Feasibility of Classification and National Guidelines for Histological Diagnosis of Canine Mammary Gland Tumours: A Multi-Institutional Ring Study

Simple Summary

Tumours of the mammary gland are common in humans, as in canine species. They are very heterogenous with numerous morphological variants and different biologic behaviours. In the last few decades, several efforts have been made to classify these tumours histologically and establish the level of malignancy by using histologic grading systems. However, reproducibility and diagnostic agreement of such classification and grading have been only rarely assessed. In this study, we tested the variability in diagnoses performed by 15 pathologists using the same classification and grading system. Prior to the study, pathologists agreed on guidelines regarding how to apply these systems. Pathologists worked blindly on 36 digital histologic slides of canine mammary tumours. The agreement was statistically analysed using Cohen’s kappa coefficient that, when equal to 1, indicates perfect agreement. The overall agreement in the identification of hyperplastic-dysplastic/benign/malignant lesions was substantial (kappa 0.76), while outcomes on morphological classification had only a moderate agreement (k = 0.54). Tumour grade assigned by pathologists was the least concordant and kappa could not be calculated. Although promising, the results underline that each diagnostic/grading system should be assessed and optimized for standardization and high diagnostic agreement.

Abstract

Histological diagnosis of Canine Mammary Tumours (CMTs) provides the basis for proper treatment and follow-up. Nowadays, its accuracy is poorly understood and variable interpretation of histological criteria leads to a lack of standardisation and impossibility to compare studies. This study aimed to quantify the reproducibility of histological diagnosis and grading in CMTs. A blinded ring test on 36 CMTs was performed by 15 veterinary pathologists with different levels of education, after discussion of critical points on the Davis-Thompson Foundation Classification and providing consensus guidelines. Kappa statistics were used to compare the interobserver variability. The overall concordance rate of diagnostic interpretations of WP on identification of hyperplasia-dysplasia/benign/malignant lesions showed a substantial agreement (average k ranging from 0.66 to 0.82, with a k-combined of 0.76). Instead, outcomes on ICD-O-3.2 morphological code /diagnosis of histotype had only a moderate agreement (average k ranging from 0.44 and 0.64, with a k-combined of 0.54). The results demonstrated that standardised classification and consensus guidelines can produce moderate to substantial agreement; however, further efforts are needed to increase this agreement in distinguishing benign versus malignant lesions and in histological grading.