Hepatology communications · 2023
Utility of pathologist panels for achieving consensus in NASH histologic scoring in clinical trials: Data from a phase 3 study.
Клиническое исследование III фазыСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sanyal Arun J, Loomba Rohit, Anstee Quentin M, Ratziu Vlad, Kowdley Kris V, Rinella Mary E, Harrison Stephen A, Resnick Murray B, Capozza Thomas, Sawhney Sangeeta, Shelat Nirav, Younossi Zobair M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Liver histopathologic assessment is the accepted surrogate endpoint in NASH trials; however, the scoring of NASH Clinical Research Network (CRN) histologic parameters is limited by intraobserver and interobserver variability. We designed a consensus panel approach to minimize variability when using this scoring system. We assessed agreement between readers, estimated linear weighted kappas between 2 panels, compared them with published pairwise kappa estimates, and addressed how agreement or disagreement might impact the precision and validity of the surrogate efficacy endpoint in NASH trials.
METHODS: Two panels, each comprising 3 liver fellowship-trained pathologists who underwent NASH histology training, independently evaluated scanned whole slide images, scoring fibrosis, inflammation, hepatocyte ballooning, and steatosis from baseline and month 18 biopsies for 100 patients from the precirrhotic NASH study REGENERATE. The consensus score for each parameter was defined as agreement by ≥2 pathologists. If consensus was not reached, all 3 pathologists read the slide jointly to achieve a consensus score.
RESULTS: Between the 2 panels, the consensus was 97%-99% for steatosis, 91%-93% for fibrosis, 88%-92% for hepatocyte ballooning, and 84%-91% for inflammation. Linear weighted kappa scores between panels were similar to published NASH CRN values.
CONCLUSIONS: A panel of 3 trained pathologists independently scoring 4 NASH CRN histology parameters produced high consensus rates. Interpanel kappa values were comparable to NASH CRN metrics, supporting the accuracy and reproducibility of this method. The high concordance for fibrosis scoring was reassuring, as fibrosis is predictive of liver-specific outcomes and all-cause mortality.
METHODS: Two panels, each comprising 3 liver fellowship-trained pathologists who underwent NASH histology training, independently evaluated scanned whole slide images, scoring fibrosis, inflammation, hepatocyte ballooning, and steatosis from baseline and month 18 biopsies for 100 patients from the precirrhotic NASH study REGENERATE. The consensus score for each parameter was defined as agreement by ≥2 pathologists. If consensus was not reached, all 3 pathologists read the slide jointly to achieve a consensus score.
RESULTS: Between the 2 panels, the consensus was 97%-99% for steatosis, 91%-93% for fibrosis, 88%-92% for hepatocyte ballooning, and 84%-91% for inflammation. Linear weighted kappa scores between panels were similar to published NASH CRN values.
CONCLUSIONS: A panel of 3 trained pathologists independently scoring 4 NASH CRN histology parameters produced high consensus rates. Interpanel kappa values were comparable to NASH CRN metrics, supporting the accuracy and reproducibility of this method. The high concordance for fibrosis scoring was reassuring, as fibrosis is predictive of liver-specific outcomes and all-cause mortality.