Low reproducibility of equivocal categories of the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytology makes the associated risk of malignancy specific to the diagnostic center.
Dorota Słowińska-Klencka: Department of Morphometry of Endocrine Glands, Chair of Endocrinology, Medical University of Lodz, 251 Pomorska Str, 92-213, Lodz, Poland. dsk@tyreo.umed.lodz.pl. ORCID
Mariusz Klencki: Department of Morphometry of Endocrine Glands, Chair of Endocrinology, Medical University of Lodz, 251 Pomorska Str, 92-213, Lodz, Poland.
Joanna Duda-Szymańska: Department of Pathomorphology, Chair of Oncology, Medical University of Lodz, 251 Pomorska Str, 92-213, Lodz, Poland.
Jarosław Szwalski: Department of Morphometry of Endocrine Glands, Chair of Endocrinology, Medical University of Lodz, 251 Pomorska Str, 92-213, Lodz, Poland.
Bożena Popowicz: Department of Morphometry of Endocrine Glands, Chair of Endocrinology, Medical University of Lodz, 251 Pomorska Str, 92-213, Lodz, Poland.
PURPOSE: Equivocal categories (III, IV, V) of the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytology (BSRTC) are characterized by high variability of the estimated risk of malignancy. The aim of the study was to analyze the reproducibility of classification of nodules into an equivocal category and the frequency of malignancy (FoM) observed in such categories. METHODS: Five experienced cytopathologists from three centers (A, B, C) independently performed reclassification of smears obtained from 213 thyroid nodules with equivocal routine cytology and known results of the postoperative histopathological examination. RESULTS: The interobserver agreement among all cytopathologists was poor, with a Krippendorff's alpha coefficient equaling 0.34. The intra-center agreement was higher than the inter-center (fair vs poor). Pathologists of the center A classified smears into categories II and III significantly less often and categories IV and V more often than pathologists of centers B and C. The joint FoM of nodules classified into any of categories IV-VI (regarded as an indication for surgery) was different among centers (A: 40.0%, B: 66.7%, C: 80.6%). The FoM of category III nodules with features of nuclear atypia (AUS) in center B and C was two times higher than that of other nodules of category III (FLUS), while in center A the FoM was similar. CONCLUSIONS: The use of published data on the risk of malignancy in nodules of particular BSRTC categories without concern for the uniqueness of the diagnostic center may lead to erroneous conclusions.
