ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2019
Do pathologists agree with each other on the histological assessment of pT1b oesophageal adenocarcinoma?
Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic Therapy in Barrett's Esophagus.Visceral medicine · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) of Upper Gastrointestinal Carcinomas: An Integrated Clinical and Pathological Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Lymphovascular invasion quantification could improve risk prediction of lymph node metastases in patients with submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma.United European gastroenterology journal · 2021Article
- Outcomes of patients with submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinoma: a multicenter cohort study.Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In early (T1) oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC), the histological profile of an endoscopic resection specimen plays a pivotal role in the prediction of lymph node metastasis and the potential need for oesophagectomy with lymphadenectomy. Objective: To evaluate the inter-observer agreement of the histological assessment of submucosal (pT1b) OAC. Methods: Surgical and endoscopic resection specimens with pT1b OAC were independently reviewed by three gastrointestinal pathologists. Agreement was determined by intraclass correlation coefficient for continuous variables, and Fleiss' kappa (κ) for categorical variables. Bland-Altman plots of the submucosal invasion depth were made. Results: Eighty-five resection specimens with pT1b OAC were evaluated. The agreement was good for differentiation grade (κ=0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68-0.87), excellent for lymphovascular invasion (κ=0.88, 95% CI 0.76-1.00) and moderate for submucosal invasion depth using the Paris and Pragmatic classifications (κ=0.60, 95% CI 0.49-0.72 and κ=0.42, 95% CI 0.33-0.51, respectively). Systematic mean differences between pathologists were detected for the measurement of submucosal invasion depth, ranging from 297 µm to 602 µm. Conclusions: A substantial discordance was found between pathologists for the measurement of submucosal invasion depth in pT1b OAC. Differences may lead to an over- or underestimation of the lymph node metastasis risk, with grave implications for the treatment strategy. Review by a second gastrointestinal pathologist is recommended to improve differentiating between a favourable and an unfavourable histological profile.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.