Prediction of adenocarcinoma in esophagectomy specimens based upon analysis of preresection biopsies of Barrett esophagus with at least high-grade dysplasia: a comparison of 2 systems.

Distinguishing Barrett esophagus with high-grade dysplasia (BE-HGD) from intramucosal and submucosal adenocarcinomas on biopsies is challenging, yet important, in the choice of therapy. The current study evaluates preresection biopsies from patients who underwent esophagectomy for at least BE-HGD, to compare the recently published histologic categories by the University of Michigan (UM) and Cleveland Clinic (CC), correlate preresection and final resection diagnosis, and identify histologic features in biopsies that might be predictive of adenocarcinoma on esophagectomy. A total of 112 cases with a consensus biopsy diagnosis (agreement by ≥4 of 7 gastrointestinal pathologists) were statistically analyzed to identify histologic features that predicted adenocarcinoma on resection. Applying the UM criteria to the biopsy series showed excellent agreement with the CC system (κ=0.86) and significant correlation between preoperative and esophagectomy diagnoses (P<0.001). The likelihood of finding carcinoma on resection was significantly higher with the category of HGD with marked glandular distortion cannot exclude intramucosal adenocarcinoma [CC; odd ratio (OR), 2.8; P=0.046] or HGD suspicious for adenocarcinoma (UM; OR, 4.3; P=0.008), compared to HGD alone. The presence of "never-ending" glands (OR, 3.7; P=0.008), sheet-like growth (P<0.001), angulated glands (OR, 8.5; P<0.001), ≥3 dilated glands with intraluminal debris (OR, 2.6; P=0.05), and >1 focus of single-cell infiltration into the lamina propria (OR, 8.9; P<0.001) increased the odds of finding carcinoma on resection. The latter 2 variables remained independent predictors of adenocarcinoma in multivariable analysis. In conclusion, the CC and UM systems show excellent agreement and define histologic categories that can improve prediction of adenocarcinoma on resection.

Poor interobserver agreement in the distinction of high-grade dysplasia and adenocarcinoma in pretreatment Barrett's esophagus biopsies.

OBJECTIVE: Grading Barrett's dysplasia at the lower end of the metaplasia-dysplasia spectrum (negative, indefinite, and low-grade dysplasia) suffers from poor interobserver agreement, even among gastrointestinal pathologists. Data evaluating interobserver agreement in Barrett's mucosal biopsies with changes at the upper end of the dysplasia spectrum (high-grade dysplasia, intramucosal, and submucosal adenocarcinoma) have not been published. The accurate categorization of pretreatment biopsies drives therapeutic decision making, but if the diagnostic distinction between cancer and high-grade dysplasia in Barrett's biopsies is inconsistent, then the use of these diagnoses to make management decisions is suspect. To this end, our aim was to assess interobserver reproducibility among a group of gastrointestinal pathologists in the interpretation of preresection biopsies. METHODS: All study pathologists agreed upon the histologic criteria distinguishing four diagnostic categories, including high-grade dysplasia; high-grade dysplasia with marked distortion of glandular architecture, cannot exclude intramucosal adenocarcinoma; intramucosal adenocarcinoma; and submucosally invasive adenocarcinoma. The histologic criteria were used to independently review preresection biopsies from 163 consecutive Barrett's esophagus patients with at least high-grade dysplasia who ultimately underwent esophagectomy. Reviewers recorded the specific histologic criteria used to categorize each case and Kappa statistics were calculated to assess interobserver agreement. RESULTS: Using kappa statistics, the overall agreement was only fair (kappa= 0.30). Agreement for high-grade dysplasia was moderate (kappa= 0.47), while agreement for high-grade dysplasia with marked architectural distortion, cannot exclude intramucosal adenocarcinoma and intramucosal adenocarcinoma were only fair (kappa= 0.21 and 0.30, respectively) and agreement for submucosal adenocarcinoma was poor (kappa= 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: The overall poor interobserver reproducibility among gastrointestinal pathologists who see a high volume of Barrett's cases calls into question treatment regimens based on the assumption that high-grade dysplasia, intramucosal adenocarcinoma, and submucosal adenocarcinoma can reliably be distinguished in biopsy specimens.

Barrett's esophagus: pathologic considerations and implications for treatment.

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a complication of chronic reflux that results in the replacement of esophageal squamous epithelium with columnar epithelium. BE is endoscopically recognized and pathologically confirmed. The presence of goblet cells is diagnostic. The pathologist must also determine if dysplasia or invasive cancer is present. Acceptable terms for dysplasia are no dysplasia, indefinite for dysplasia, low-grade dysplasia (LGD), or high-grade dysplasia (HGD). It can be difficult to differentiate HGD from intramucosal cancer (IMC) in an endoscopic biopsy specimen. Treatment based on this differentiation is problematic. Indications for treatment of BE are similar to those of patients without BE. Treatment will not cause clinically significant regression of BE or prevent progression to cancer. Cancer development following successful antireflux surgery is uncommon.

Unexpected gynecologic neoplasms in patients with proven or suspected BRCA-1 or -2 mutations: implications for gross examination, cytology, and clinical follow-up.

Identification of inheritable mutations associated with the development of malignancy has led to prophylactic surgeries to remove tissues at risk. We report seven unrelated patients with family histories of breast and/or ovarian cancer, five of whom underwent prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy with hysterectomy. Four had proven BRCA-1 or -2 mutations. Malignant cells were found unexpectedly in the peritoneal washings of two patients, leading to the discovery of early-stage fallopian tube carcinoma. After changing the sampling technique at our institution, two more cases of unexpected fallopian tube carcinoma in situ were discovered. Another patient had a significant family history and underwent hysterectomy for uterine fibroids, leading to the discovery of fallopian tube carcinoma. Another patient with BRCA-1 mutation had unexpected widespread primary peritoneal papillary serous adenocarcinoma. The final patient had a borderline malignant clear cell adenofibroma. These cases underscore the importance of peritoneal cytology and thorough sampling in the management of patients undergoing hysterectomy with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer and/or known BRCA-1/BRCA-2 mutations. As prophylactic surgeries are becoming more common secondary to advances in molecular diagnostics, pathologists need to be aware that surgical specimens from these patients may require more rigorous examination to uncover early neoplastic changes.