A Comparative and Evaluative Study of Two Cytological Grading Systems in Breast Carcinoma with Histological Grading: An Important Prognostic Factor
Objective. Cytonuclear gradings in the breast carcinoma raise the level of FNA reportage and improves patient management. Our aim was to evaluate and compare two cytological grading methods (Robinson’s and Mouriquand’s) in breast carcinoma and correlate it with Nottingham modification of Scarff-Bloo...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2014-01-01
|
| Series: | Analytical Cellular Pathology |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/767215 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849409725836296192 |
|---|---|
| author | Pinki Pandey Alok Dixit Subrat Chandra Swarn Kaur |
| author_facet | Pinki Pandey Alok Dixit Subrat Chandra Swarn Kaur |
| author_sort | Pinki Pandey |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objective. Cytonuclear gradings in the breast carcinoma raise the level of FNA reportage and improves patient management. Our aim was to evaluate and compare two cytological grading methods (Robinson’s and Mouriquand’s) in breast carcinoma and correlate it with Nottingham modification of Scarff-Bloom-Richardson (SBR) histological grading. Materials and Methods. 30 cytologically proven cases of infiltrating ductal carcinoma were graded cytologically and histologically. Cytograding was done by Robinson’s and Mouriquand’s methods (grades I to III) followed by comparison of the two methods. Cytogradings were correlated with SBR grading method. Sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic accuracy, and concordance and discordance rates were evaluated. Results. An overall concordance of 76.66% between cytogradings, of 83.33% between Robinson’s method and SBR, and of 66.66% between Mouriquand’s method and SBR was seen. Robinson’s method correlated best with SBR in all the three nuclear grades. Robinson’s method showed a diagnostic accuracy of 90% with 91.30% sensitivity while Mouriquand’s method had an accuracy of 76.66% with 95.65% sensitivity. The specificity by Mouriquand’s method was quite low (14.28%) as compared to Robinson’s method (85.71%). Conclusion. Comprehensive cytological grading of breast cancer by Robinson’s method seems better because of more objective set of criteria, easy reproducibility, and specificity. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-81ea066cf5dc40d1a4f94a02bd3536ad |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2210-7177 2210-7185 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2014-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Analytical Cellular Pathology |
| spelling | doaj-art-81ea066cf5dc40d1a4f94a02bd3536ad2025-08-20T03:35:24ZengWileyAnalytical Cellular Pathology2210-71772210-71852014-01-01201410.1155/2014/767215767215A Comparative and Evaluative Study of Two Cytological Grading Systems in Breast Carcinoma with Histological Grading: An Important Prognostic FactorPinki Pandey0Alok Dixit1Subrat Chandra2Swarn Kaur3Department of Pathology, U. P. Rural Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Saifai, Etawah 206301, IndiaDepartment of Pharmacology, U. P. Rural Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Saifai, Etawah 206301, IndiaDepartment of Pathology, RML Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, IndiaDepartment of Pathology, BPS Medical College, Khanpur, Sonepat, Haryana, IndiaObjective. Cytonuclear gradings in the breast carcinoma raise the level of FNA reportage and improves patient management. Our aim was to evaluate and compare two cytological grading methods (Robinson’s and Mouriquand’s) in breast carcinoma and correlate it with Nottingham modification of Scarff-Bloom-Richardson (SBR) histological grading. Materials and Methods. 30 cytologically proven cases of infiltrating ductal carcinoma were graded cytologically and histologically. Cytograding was done by Robinson’s and Mouriquand’s methods (grades I to III) followed by comparison of the two methods. Cytogradings were correlated with SBR grading method. Sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic accuracy, and concordance and discordance rates were evaluated. Results. An overall concordance of 76.66% between cytogradings, of 83.33% between Robinson’s method and SBR, and of 66.66% between Mouriquand’s method and SBR was seen. Robinson’s method correlated best with SBR in all the three nuclear grades. Robinson’s method showed a diagnostic accuracy of 90% with 91.30% sensitivity while Mouriquand’s method had an accuracy of 76.66% with 95.65% sensitivity. The specificity by Mouriquand’s method was quite low (14.28%) as compared to Robinson’s method (85.71%). Conclusion. Comprehensive cytological grading of breast cancer by Robinson’s method seems better because of more objective set of criteria, easy reproducibility, and specificity.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/767215 |
| spellingShingle | Pinki Pandey Alok Dixit Subrat Chandra Swarn Kaur A Comparative and Evaluative Study of Two Cytological Grading Systems in Breast Carcinoma with Histological Grading: An Important Prognostic Factor Analytical Cellular Pathology |
| title | A Comparative and Evaluative Study of Two Cytological Grading Systems in Breast Carcinoma with Histological Grading: An Important Prognostic Factor |
| title_full | A Comparative and Evaluative Study of Two Cytological Grading Systems in Breast Carcinoma with Histological Grading: An Important Prognostic Factor |
| title_fullStr | A Comparative and Evaluative Study of Two Cytological Grading Systems in Breast Carcinoma with Histological Grading: An Important Prognostic Factor |
| title_full_unstemmed | A Comparative and Evaluative Study of Two Cytological Grading Systems in Breast Carcinoma with Histological Grading: An Important Prognostic Factor |
| title_short | A Comparative and Evaluative Study of Two Cytological Grading Systems in Breast Carcinoma with Histological Grading: An Important Prognostic Factor |
| title_sort | comparative and evaluative study of two cytological grading systems in breast carcinoma with histological grading an important prognostic factor |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/767215 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT pinkipandey acomparativeandevaluativestudyoftwocytologicalgradingsystemsinbreastcarcinomawithhistologicalgradinganimportantprognosticfactor AT alokdixit acomparativeandevaluativestudyoftwocytologicalgradingsystemsinbreastcarcinomawithhistologicalgradinganimportantprognosticfactor AT subratchandra acomparativeandevaluativestudyoftwocytologicalgradingsystemsinbreastcarcinomawithhistologicalgradinganimportantprognosticfactor AT swarnkaur acomparativeandevaluativestudyoftwocytologicalgradingsystemsinbreastcarcinomawithhistologicalgradinganimportantprognosticfactor AT pinkipandey comparativeandevaluativestudyoftwocytologicalgradingsystemsinbreastcarcinomawithhistologicalgradinganimportantprognosticfactor AT alokdixit comparativeandevaluativestudyoftwocytologicalgradingsystemsinbreastcarcinomawithhistologicalgradinganimportantprognosticfactor AT subratchandra comparativeandevaluativestudyoftwocytologicalgradingsystemsinbreastcarcinomawithhistologicalgradinganimportantprognosticfactor AT swarnkaur comparativeandevaluativestudyoftwocytologicalgradingsystemsinbreastcarcinomawithhistologicalgradinganimportantprognosticfactor |