Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
International Opinions on Grading of Urothelial Carcinoma: A Survey Among European Association of Urology and International Society of Urological Pathology Members.
Beijert, Irene J; Cheng, Liang; Liedberg, Fredrik; Plass, Karin; Williamson, Sean R; Gontero, Paolo; Ribal, Maria J; Babjuk, Marko; Black, Peter C; Kamat, Ashish M; Algaba, Ferran; Berman, David M; Hartmann, Arndt; Masson-Lecomte, Alexandra; Rouprêt, Morgan; Lopez-Beltran, Antonio; Samaratunga, Hemamali; Shariat, Shahrokh F; Mostafid, A Hugh; Varma, Murali; Shen, Steven; Burger, Maximilian; Tsuzuki, Toyonori; Palou, Joan; Compérat, Eva M; Sylvester, Richard J; van der Kwast, Theo H; van Rhijn, Bas W G; Downes, Michelle R.
Afiliación
  • Beijert IJ; Department of Surgical Oncology (Urology), Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Cheng L; Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Liedberg F; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Brown University Warren Alpert Medical School, Lifespan Academic Medical Center and Legorreta Cancer Center at Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
  • Plass K; Department of Translational Medicine, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
  • Williamson SR; Department of Urology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
  • Gontero P; European Association of Urology, Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Guidelines Panel, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
  • Ribal MJ; European Association of Urology, Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Guidelines Panel, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
  • Babjuk M; European Association of Urology, Guidelines Office Board, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
  • Black PC; Department of Pathology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
  • Kamat AM; European Association of Urology, Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Guidelines Panel, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
  • Algaba F; Department of Urology, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Torino School of Medicine, Torino, Italy.
  • Berman DM; European Association of Urology, Guidelines Office Board, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
  • Hartmann A; Department of Urology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
  • Masson-Lecomte A; European Association of Urology, Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Guidelines Panel, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
  • Rouprêt M; Department of Urology, Teaching Hospital Motol and 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University Praha, Prague, Czech Republic.
  • Lopez-Beltran A; Department of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University Vienna, Vienna General Hospital, Vienna, Austria.
  • Samaratunga H; Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  • Shariat SF; Department of Urology, University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
  • Mostafid AH; Department of Pathology, Fundació Puigvert, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
  • Varma M; Kingston Health Sciences Centre, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
  • Shen S; Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
  • Burger M; Institute of Pathology, Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
  • Tsuzuki T; European Association of Urology, Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Guidelines Panel, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
  • Palou J; Department of Urology, Université de Paris, APHP, Saint Louis Hospital, Paris, France.
  • Compérat EM; European Association of Urology, Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer Guidelines Panel, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
  • Sylvester RJ; Department of Urology, Pitié Salpétrière Hospital, AP-HP, GRC n°5, ONCOTYPE-URO, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
  • van der Kwast TH; Department of Morphological Sciences, University of Cordoba Medical School, Cordoba, Spain.
  • van Rhijn BWG; Anatomic Pathology, Champalimaud Clinical Center, Lisbon, Portugal.
  • Downes MR; Department of Pathology, Aquesta Uropathology and University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Eur Urol Open Sci ; 52: 154-165, 2023 Jun.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37284047
ABSTRACT

Background:

Grade of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is an important prognostic factor for progression. Currently, two World Health Organization (WHO) classification systems (WHO1973, categories grade 1-3, and WHO2004 categories papillary urothelial neoplasm of low malignant potential [PUNLMP], low-grade [LG], high-grade [HG] carcinoma) are used.

Objective:

To ask the European Association of Urology (EAU) and International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) members regarding their current practice and preferences of grading systems. Design setting and

participants:

A web-based, anonymous questionnaire with ten questions on grading of NMIBC was created. The members of EAU and ISUP were invited to complete an online survey by the end of 2021. Thirteen experts had previously answered the same questions. Outcome measurements and statistical

analysis:

The submitted answers from 214 ISUP members, 191 EAU members, and 13 experts were analyzed. Results and

limitations:

Currently, 53% use only the WHO2004 system and 40% use both systems. According to most respondents, PUNLMP is a rare diagnosis with management similar to Ta-LG carcinoma. The majority (72%) would consider reverting back to WHO1973 if grading criteria were more detailed. Separate reporting of WHO1973-G3 within WHO2004-HG would influence clinical decisions for Ta and/or T1 tumors according the majority (55%). Most respondents preferred a two-tier (41%) or a three-tier (41%) grading system. The current WHO2004 grading system is supported by a minority (20%), whereas nearly half (48%) supported a hybrid three- or four-tier grading system composed of both WHO1973 and WHO2004. The survey results of the experts were comparable with ISUP and EAU respondents.

Conclusions:

Both the WHO1973 and the WHO2004 grading system are still widely used. Even though opinions on the future of bladder cancer grading were strongly divided, there was limited support for WHO1973 and WHO2004 in their current formats, while the hybrid (three-tier) grading system with LG, HG-G2, and HG-G3 as categories could be considered the most promising alternative. Patient

summary:

Grading of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) is a matter of ongoing debate and lacks international consensus. We surveyed urologists and pathologists of European Association of Urology and International Society of Urological Pathology on their preferences regarding NMIBC grading to generate a multidisciplinary dialogue. Both the "old" World Health Organization (WHO) 1973 and the "new" WHO2004 grading schemes are still used widely. However, continuation of both the WHO1973 and the WHO2004 system showed limited support, while a hybrid grading system composed of both the WHO1973 and the WHO2004 classification system may be considered a promising alternative.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Revista: Eur Urol Open Sci Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Países Bajos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Revista: Eur Urol Open Sci Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Países Bajos