Skip to main content

Table 4 Details of the difficult cases a

From: Interobserver variation in classifying lymphomas among hematopathologists

Case no. Consensus diagnosis Discordance of the original diagnosisb Frequency of each diagnostic categoryc
Concordance Minor discordance Major discordance Serious discordance
86 MALT lymphoma Minor 0 2 3 0
101 Extranodal NK/T-cell lymphomad Major 0 1 3 0
19 Diffuse large B-cell lymphomad - 4 0 3 0
83 Lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma Minor 0 2 2 0
32 Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma - 3 0 2 0
82 Lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma Minor 2 4 1 0
113 Peripheral T-cell lymphoma, NOS Major 1 2 1 0
78 Follicular lymphoma - 3 2 1 0
36 Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma - 0 5 0 0
100 Extranodal NK/T-cell lymphomad Minor 0 5 0 0
93 Mixed cellularity classical HL Minor 1 5 0 0
76 Follicular lymphoma - 3 4 0 0
109 Nodular sclerosis classical HL Major 3 4 0 0
98 Nodal marginal zone lymphoma - 3 3 0 0
84 Lymphocyte-rich classical HL Minor 1 2 0 0
91 Mixed cellularity classical HL Minor 3 2 0 0
62 Diffuse large B-cell lymphomad - 3 2 0 0
116 T lymphoblastic lymphoma - 3 2 0 0
23 Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma - 1 1 0 0
Total   23 30 11 0
  1. aDifficult cases were cases that at least 40% of hematopathologists (participants) made discordant diagnoses.
  2. bOriginal diagnoses, initially made by attending pathologists in clinical services, were also categorized into 4 categories by comparing to the consensus diagnoses. Blanks represent "concordance".
  3. cPlease see the description of each diagnostic category in Table 1.
  4. dCases that consensus diagnoses could not be reached at the initial meeting and additional investigations were performed before reaching the consensus diagnoses.