Abstract:We read with great interest the article by Bhorade et al1Bhorade SM Husain AN Liao C et al.Interobserver variability in grading transbronchial lung biopsy specimens after lung transplantation.Chest. 2013; 143: 1717-1724Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (47) Google Scholar in CHEST (June 2013) about the interobserver agreement of grading acute rejection after lung transplantation. They indicated that the overall concordance rates for grade A and grade B biopsy specimens were 74% and 89%, respectively, and interobserver discrepancies for acute rejection were lower when pulmonary biopsies were performed earlier (≤ 6 weeks) compared with later time points. However, we would like to add more information after deeper analysis of the data and address some important concerns. In the Bhorade et al1Bhorade SM Husain AN Liao C et al.Interobserver variability in grading transbronchial lung biopsy specimens after lung transplantation.Chest. 2013; 143: 1717-1724Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (47) Google Scholar study, the interobserver agreement for grade A and grade B readings were presented as the overall concordance rate, as well as that determined by treatment arm and clinical symptoms. The overall concordance rate ranged from 62% to 91%, according to the data from the tables in the article1Bhorade SM Husain AN Liao C et al.Interobserver variability in grading transbronchial lung biopsy specimens after lung transplantation.Chest. 2013; 143: 1717-1724Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (47) Google Scholar; however, it should be noted that the interobserver agreement provided by the authors was ambiguous and requires further analysis. Therefore, we conducted κ analysis to reevaluate the concordance of interpretations for acute rejection between site pathologist and central pathologist (based on the data presented in tables in the article). The score of Cohen κ coefficients ranged from 0 to 1, where κ scores ≥ 0.75 represent fair agreement, scores < 0.4 represent poor agreement, and the scale of 0.4 to 0.75 was considered moderate agreement. The McNemar-Bowker test was performed to estimate the diagnostic differences between site pathologist and central pathologist. After thorough statistical analysis of the data from Tables 2 and 3 in the Bhorade et al1Bhorade SM Husain AN Liao C et al.Interobserver variability in grading transbronchial lung biopsy specimens after lung transplantation.Chest. 2013; 143: 1717-1724Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (47) Google Scholar article, we found that site pathologists were more likely to judge the acute rejection at a higher level for both grade A readings and grade B readings (P = .000 and .002, respectively), and the κ scores showed poor interobserver agreement for both grade A and grade B readings (κ = 0.276 and 0.195, respectively).Table 2—κ Analysis and McNemar-Bowker Test for Grade B ReadingsTypeGroupκ Score (Patients, No.)McNemar-Bowker Test, P ValueImmunosuppressantAzathioprine0.142 (214).015Sirolimus0.313 (198).096SymptomsSurveillance0.123 (350).011Clinical0.347 (62).146 Open table in a new tab Also, as we can see from Table 1, when the effect of the immunosuppressant type and symptoms in interobserver agreement for grade A readings were reassessed, moderate agreement for the azathioprine group was achieved (κ = 0.472), whereas poor agreement for the sirolimus group, surveillance, and clinical biopsy specimens (κ < 0.4) was found, and more acute rejections at a higher level were diagnosed by site pathologists when compared with central pathologists (P < .05). Poor concordance was observed for grade B readings (κ < 0.4) (Table 2), and discrepancy in diagnostic ability existed between the site and central pathologists for the azathioprine group and surveillance biopsy specimens (P = .015 and .011, respectively); however, there was no difference regarding the diagnostic ability for the sirolimus group and clinical biopsy specimens (P = .096 and .146, respectively). Hence, it is important to recognize the differences in diagnostic capability for acute rejection between central and site pathologists in the context of the current grading system.Table 1—κ Analysis and McNemar-Bowker Test for Grade A ReadingsTypeGroupκ Score (Patients, No.)McNemar-Bowker Test, P ValueImmunosuppressantAzathioprine0.472 (251).000Sirolimus0.244 (221).002SymptomsSurveillance0.373 (386).000Clinical0.279 (86).000 Open table in a new tab The data analysis as an addition to the article reflects that results may be confused by some factors that complicate clinical decision-making. Identification of risk factors as predictors of acute rejection after lung transplantation may facilitate the diagnosis of acute rejection and reduce morbidity. Some studies reported that patients with human leukocyte antigen (HLA) mismatches at the B and DR loci were more susceptible to acute rejection, implying that bias introduced by mismatches at the HLA-DR and HLA-B loci may affect interobserver agreement for acute rejection after transplant,2Schulman LL Weinberg AD McGregor C Galantowicz ME Suciu-Foca NM Itescu S Mismatches at the HLA-DR and HLA-B loci are risk factors for acute rejection after lung transplantation.Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998; 157: 1833-1837Crossref PubMed Scopus (64) Google Scholar, 3Mangi AA Mason DP Nowicki ER et al.Predictors of acute rejection after lung transplantation.Ann Thorac Surg. 2011; 91: 1754-1762Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (37) Google Scholar which should be included in the statistical analysis. Moreover, whether the transplant type influences the interobserver agreement remains undecided. Bhorade et al1Bhorade SM Husain AN Liao C et al.Interobserver variability in grading transbronchial lung biopsy specimens after lung transplantation.Chest. 2013; 143: 1717-1724Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (47) Google Scholar mentioned that the concordance rate of scheduled biopsy specimens was higher than that of clinical bronchoscopy.1Bhorade SM Husain AN Liao C et al.Interobserver variability in grading transbronchial lung biopsy specimens after lung transplantation.Chest. 2013; 143: 1717-1724Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (47) Google Scholar Not only the blinded analysis, but the complex state of the illness per se often complicated the specimen readings when patients presented with clinical symptoms, with greater deviations made both by the site and central pathologists. Therefore, repeated blinded readings of one slide by the same pathologist as a reliable policy is a promising approach to decrease the interobserver disagreement. In addition, although further education for pathologists to improve concordance in grading acute rejection was recommended by the authors,1Bhorade SM Husain AN Liao C et al.Interobserver variability in grading transbronchial lung biopsy specimens after lung transplantation.Chest. 2013; 143: 1717-1724Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (47) Google Scholar optimal modifications to the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation grading system for acute rejection after lung transplantation should be made with the accumulation of clinical experience resembling the evolution of TNM classification for non-small-cell lung cancer.4Detterbeck FC Boffa DJ Tanoue LT The new lung cancer staging system.Chest. 2009; 136: 260-271Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (784) Google Scholar, 5Saji H Tsuboi M Shimada Y et al.A proposal for combination of total number and anatomical location of involved lymph nodes for nodal classification in non-small cell lung cancer.Chest. 2013; 143: 1618-1625Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (65) Google Scholar ResponseCHESTVol. 145Issue 2PreviewWe thank Dr Mao and colleagues for their interest in our recent article.1 We appreciate that their analysis and comments are in agreement with our analysis and the conclusions of our article. However, we would like to clarify the rationale for our analysis in comparison with their analysis of our data. Full-Text PDF

Response to Chen et al and the Accompanying Commentary

Response to Adnan et al

Liver Transplantation in Patients with Liver Failure: Twenty Years of Experience from China

Gender issues in solid organ donation and transplantation.

Reply to ‘how to Select Eligible Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients with Portal Vein Tumor Thrombus for Deceased Donor Liver Transplantation?’

Expert Consensus on Perioperative Management of Liver Transplantation in Adults with Acute-on-chronic Liver Failure

Corrigendum to “artificial Liver Support System Improves Short-Term Outcomes of Patients with HBV-Associated Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure: A Propensity Score Analysis”

Liver Transplantation in China: Problems and Their Solutions.

Twenty-nine Years Experience of Kidney Transplantation from Zhejiang University.

Corrigendum: Lymphatic Reconstruction in Kidney Allograft Aggravates Chronic Rejection by Promoting Alloantigen Presentation

Corrigendum: Immune Tolerance Induced by Hematopoietic Stem Cell Infusion after HLA Identical Sibling Kidney Transplantation

Addressing the Complexities of Pre-Liver Transplant Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Response to Recent Commentaries

Clinical Analysis of 2520 Renal Transplantations in One Center

Response to “influence on the Other Patients in the Waiting List when Expanding the Milan Criteria” and “can Milan Criteria Be Expanded Effectively for Liver Transplantation in Patients with HCC?”

Reply to Huang Et Al.

Transplantation: current developments and future directions

Editorial: Liver transplantation for liver cancer in the era of transplant oncology: accurate diagnosis and treatment.

Safety limitations of fatty liver transplantation can be extended to 40%: experience of a single center in China.

Recent Controversies in Liver Transplantation

Interobserver Variability in Grading Acute Rejection after Lung Transplantation

Correction: Abraham et al. Epidemiology and Long-Term Outcomes in Thoracic Transplantation. Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease 2023, 10, 397