Drivers of Diagnostic Variation in a Digital Global Kidney Transplant Reader Study

Background Diagnostic interpretation of kidney allograft biopsies using the Banff classification remains variable, but the determinants of this variability are not fully defined. We performed a global, fully digital multi-reader study to identify the principal drivers of disagreement in Banff-based assessment. Methods Thirty six kidney transplant biopsies were independently scored by 67 renal pathologists on a standardized digital platform. Readers assessed Banff lesions on hematoxylin and eosin, periodic acid Schiff, and Jones' silver stains; final diagnostic categories were assigned using prespecified Banff-based decision rules. Interobserver agreement was quantified with Gwet's agreement coefficient (AC) statistics. Determinants of diagnostic agreement were evaluated) using pairwise mixed-effects logistic regression, and reader similarity was examined by principal component analysis (PCA) with post hoc molecular annotation. Results Agreement for final diagnostic categories was moderate (Gwet's AC1, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.47 - 0.63). Lesion-level agreement varied substantially, with lowest agreement for selected threshold-dependent inflammatory or semi-quantitative lesions, including interstitial inflammation in areas of IFTA, peritubular capillaritis and arteriolar hyalinosis. Diagnostic concordance differed markedly across biopsies, indicating strong case-level heterogeneity. In pairwise models, differences in active inflammatory and vascular lesion scoring were the strongest correlates of diagnostic disagreement; reader experience and geography contributed minimally. Principal component analysis showed reader variation was organized along two dominant axes: a rejection-calling threshold axis linked mainly to tubulointerstitial inflammatory injury, and a T cell-mediated (TCMR/TI) and antibody-mediated/microvascular (AMR/MVI) inflammation-oriented phenotypic classification axis. Conclusion Interobserver variation in Banff-based kidney transplant biopsy assessment is structured rather than random and driven mainly by how readers threshold and integrate key inflammatory lesion compartments rather than experience or geographic location.