MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pathologic Interpretation of Transbronchial Biopsy for Acute Rejection of Lung Allograft Is Highly Variable

2011· article· en· W1672444070 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Transplantation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung transplantationBiopsyGrading (engineering)LungTransplantationKappaPathologyRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the standardization of pathologic grading of acute rejection in transbronchial lung biopsies following lung transplantation, the reproducibility of pathologic diagnosis has not been adequately evaluated. To determine the interobserver variability for pathologic grading of acute rejection, 1566 biopsies from 845 subjects in the Lung Allograft Rejection Gene Expression Observational study were regraded by a pathology panel blinded to the original diagnosis and compared to the grade of acute rejection assigned by individual center pathologists. The study panel confirmed 49.1% of center pathologists’ A0 grades, but upgraded 5.7% to A1 and 2.7% to grade ≥ A2 rejection; 42.5% were regraded as AX. Of 268 grade A1 samples, 21.2% were confirmed by the pathology panel; 18.7% were upgraded to ≥ A2 and 35.8% were downgraded to A0 with 24.3% being regraded as AX. Lastly, 53.5% of ≥ A2 cases were confirmed, but 15.7% were downgraded to grade A0 and 18.4% cases to A1, while 12.4% were regraded as AX. The kappa value for interobserver agreement was 0.183 (95%CI 0.147–0.220, p < 0.001). The results for B grade interpretation were similar. Suboptimal sampling is common and a high degree of variability exists in the pathologic interpretation of acute rejection in transbronchial biopsies. Despite the standardization of pathologic grading of acute rejection in transbronchial lung biopsies following lung transplantation, the reproducibility of pathologic diagnosis has not been adequately evaluated. To determine the interobserver variability for pathologic grading of acute rejection, 1566 biopsies from 845 subjects in the Lung Allograft Rejection Gene Expression Observational study were regraded by a pathology panel blinded to the original diagnosis and compared to the grade of acute rejection assigned by individual center pathologists. The study panel confirmed 49.1% of center pathologists’ A0 grades, but upgraded 5.7% to A1 and 2.7% to grade ≥ A2 rejection; 42.5% were regraded as AX. Of 268 grade A1 samples, 21.2% were confirmed by the pathology panel; 18.7% were upgraded to ≥ A2 and 35.8% were downgraded to A0 with 24.3% being regraded as AX. Lastly, 53.5% of ≥ A2 cases were confirmed, but 15.7% were downgraded to grade A0 and 18.4% cases to A1, while 12.4% were regraded as AX. The kappa value for interobserver agreement was 0.183 (95%CI 0.147–0.220, p < 0.001). The results for B grade interpretation were similar. Suboptimal sampling is common and a high degree of variability exists in the pathologic interpretation of acute rejection in transbronchial biopsies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it