ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2021
Reproducibility of tumor budding assessment in pancreatic cancer based on a multicenter interobserver study.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing Tumour Budding in Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Comparative Analysis of Digital Whole-Slide Imaging and Light Microscopy.Pathobiology : journal of immunopathology, molecular and cellular biology · 2026Article
- Microenvironmental code of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: The prognostic symphony of budding, matrix and lymphocytes.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Evaluation of tumor budding, desmoplastic reaction, and lymphocytic infiltration in predicting survival for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Tumor budding and fibrotic focus-proposed grading system for tumor budding in invasive carcinoma no special type of the breast.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tumor budding has been reported to be an independent prognostic factor in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Its use in daily diagnostics would improve the prognostic stratification of patients. We performed a multicenter interobserver study to test various budding assessment methods for their reproducibility. Two serial sections of 50 resected, treatment-naïve PDACs were stained for Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) and pancytokeratin. Tumor budding was scored by independent observers at five participating centers in Switzerland, Germany, and Canada. Pathologists assessed tumor budding on a digital platform comparing H&E with pancytokeratin staining in 10 high-power fields (10HPF) and one HPF hotspot (1HPF). Additionally, tumor budding was assessed in one H&E hotspot at × 20 magnification, as suggested by the International Tumor Budding Consensus Conference (ITBCC). Correlation coefficients for bud counts between centers ranged from r = 0.58648 to r = 0.78641 for H&E and from r = 0.69288 to r = 0.81764 for pancytokeratin. The highest interobserver agreement across all centers was observed for pancytokeratin 10HPFs (ICC = 0.6). ICC values were 0.49, 0.48, 0.41, and 0.4 for H&E in 1HPF hotspot, H&E in 10HPFs, pancytokeratin in 1HPF, and H&E in one hotspot at ×20, respectively (ITBCC method). This interobserver study reveals a range between moderately poor to moderate agreement levels between pathologists for the different tumor budding assessment methods in PDAC. Acceptable levels of agreement were reached with the pancytokeratin 10HPF method, which can thus be recommended for the assessment of tumor budding in PDAC resection specimens. To improve the levels of interobserver agreement, the implementation of machine learning applications should be considered.
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.