MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412764958 · doi:10.1097/pas.0000000000002456

Interobserver Reproducibility of Pelvicalyceal Invasion in Renal Cell Carcinoma Nephrectomies Among Genitourinary Pathologists

2025· article· en· W4412764958 on OpenAlexaff
Ankur R. Sangoi, Mahmut Akgül, Aysha Mubeen, Robert Humble, Douglas Wu, Richard R. Pacheco, Andrés Acosta, Manju Aron, Fadi Brimo, Emily Chan, Liang Cheng, John C. Cheville, Katrina Collins, Kristine M. Cornejo, Jasreman Dhillon, Michelle R. Downes, Jonathan I. Epstein, Michelle S. Hirsch, Payal Kapur, Anandi Lobo, Rohit Mehra, Sambit K. Mohanty, George J. Netto, Adeboye O. Osunkoya, Gladell P. Paner, Priya Rao, Rola Saleeb, Rajal B. Shah, Steven S. Shen, Steven C. Smith, Satish K. Tickoo, Maria Tretiakova, Kiril Trpkov, Sara E. Wobker, Pheroze Tamboli, Debra L. Zynger, Sean R. Williamson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreHealth Sciences CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRenal sinusConventional PCIRenal pelvisUrotheliumRadiologyRenal cell carcinomaGenitourinary systemPathologyUrologyUrinary bladderKidneyNephrectomyAnatomyInternal medicineUreter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pelvicalyceal invasion (PCI) is a relatively novel pT3a staging parameter for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) nephrectomies. While interobserver reproducibility staging studies of sinus/vascular invasion in RCC exist, a similar evaluation for PCI has not been performed. Moreover, in our experience, there is also diagnostic variability in how pathologists interpret PCI. Herein, we explore interobserver reproducibility among genitourinary (GU) pathologists. Twenty hematoxylin and eosin-stained digitized slides from RCCs (all grossly approaching the renal pelvis) were distributed to 31 GU pathologists to classify each as PCI or not PCI based on their respective clinical practices; slides with concomitant sinus/fat/vascular invasion were excluded. Slides were then evaluated for the following 4 morphologic features: tumor abutting renal pelvis, tumor pushing/indenting into the renal pelvis, polypoid configuration of tumor into the renal pelvis, and tumor eroding through renal pelvic urothelium. Interobserver reproducibility was assessed, and the morphologic features were correlated with PCI. Relationships between pathologists' interpretations, morphologic features, and PCI were evaluated using hierarchical clustering. Although the diagnosis of PCI was relatively uniform with a majority agreement (>67%) reached in 16/20 slides, overall interobserver reproducibility was only moderate (kappa=0.601). While all 4 morphologic features were sensitive for PCI, polypoid configuration of the tumor into the renal pelvis and the tumor eroding through the renal pelvic urothelium were most specific (90%, 100%, respectively). Although we show general consensus among genitourinary pathologists on PCI assessment, clarifying the diagnostic guidelines with specific criteria should be included in pathologic staging systems.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Surgical PathologySame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207