Prognostic value of nuclear area index in patients with bladder cancer

International Journal of Urology

Volumn 11, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 374-378

  Yusup, Anwar ^a   Kanamaru, Hiroshi ^a   Aoki, Yoshitaka ^a   Saikawa, Shigeki ^a   Moriyama, Norihiro ^a   Oyama, Nobuyuki ^a   Akino, Hironobu ^a   Okada, Kenichiro ^a   Yokoyama, Osamu ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FUKUI   (Japan)

Author keywords

Bladder cancer; Nuclear area index; Nuclear morphometry; Prognosis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLADDER CANCER; CANCER GRADING; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CELL NUCLEUS; CELL STRUCTURE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYSTECTOMY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MORPHOMETRICS; NUCLEAR AREA INDEX; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; SURVIVAL RATE;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CARCINOMA, TRANSITIONAL CELL; CELL NUCLEUS; CYSTECTOMY; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; URINARY BLADDER NEOPLASMS;

EID: 3042737994     PISSN: 09198172     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2004.00813.x     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Mostofi FK. International classification of tumours, no. 10. Histological classification of urinary bladder tumours. World Health Organisation, Geneva, 1973.
2. Collan Y, Makinen J, Heikkinen A. Histological grading of transitional cell tumours of the bladder. Value of histological grading (WHO) in prognosis. Eur. Urol. 1979; 5: 311-18.
3. Cheng L, Weaver AL, Leibovich BC et al. Predicting the survival of bladder carcinoma patients treated with radical cystectomy. Cancer 2000; 88: 2326-32.
4. Epstein JI, Amin MB, Reuter VR, Mostofi FK. The World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology consensus classification of urothelial (transitional cell) neoplasms of the urinary bladder. Bladder Consensus Conference Committee. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 1998; 22: 1435-48.
5. Blomjous CE, Schipper NW, Vos W, Baak JP, de Voogt HJ, Meijer CJ. Comparison of quantitative and classic prognosticators in urinary bladder carcinoma. A multivariate analysis of DNA flow cytometric, nuclear morphometric and clinicopathological features. Virchows. Arch. 1989; 415: 421-8.
6. Nielsen K, Petersen SE, Orntoft T. A comparison between stereological estimates of mean nuclear Volume and DNA flow cytometry in bladder cancer. APMIS. 1989; 97: 949-56.
7. Lipponen PK, Collan Y, Eskelinen MJ, Pesonen E, Sotarauta M. Morphometry in human transitional cell bladder cancer. Nuclear area and standard deviation of nuclear area-relation to tumor grade (WHO) and prognosis. Eur. Urol. 1990; 17: 155-60.
8. Goudarzi HA, Lyttle JA, Mundy AR. Tumor morphometry as prongostic factor in T1 and T2 bladder cancer. Urology. 1984; 23: 205-207.
9. Nielsen K, Orntoft T, Wolf H. Stereological estimates of nuclear volume in noninvasive bladder tumors (Ta) correlated with the recurrence pattern. Cancer. 1989; 64:2269-74.
10. Helander K, Kirkhus B, Iversen OH et al. Studies on urinary bladder carcinoma by morphometry, flow cytometry, and light microscopic malignancy grading with special reference to grade II tumours. Virchows. Arch. 1985; 408: 117-26.
11. Blomjous CE, Smeulders AW, Baak JP, Vos W, van Galen CM, Meijer CJ. A comparative study in morphometric grading of transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Anal. Quant. Cytol. Histol. 1989; 11: 426-32.
12. Lipponen P, Simpanen H, Pesonen E, Eskelinen M, Sotarauta M, Collan Y. Potential of morphometry in grading transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Pathol. Res. Pract. 1989; 185: 617-20.
13. Lipponen PK, Kosma VM, Collan Y, Kulju T, Kosunen O, Eskelinen M. Potential of nuclear morphometry and volume corrected mitotic index in grading transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Eur. Urol. 1990; 17: 333-7.
14. Japanese Urological Association and Japanese Society of Pathology (eds). General rule for clinical and pathological studies on bladder cancer, 2nd edn. Kanehara Shuppan Co. Ltd, Tokyo, 1993.
15. Kanamaru H, Akino H, Suzuki Y, Noriki S, Okada K. Prognostic value of nuclear area index in combination with the World Health Organization grading system for patients with renal cell carcinoma. Urology 2001; 57: 257-61.
16. Morgan JD, Bowsher W, Griffiths DF, Matthews PN. Rationalization of follow-up in patients with non-invasive bladder tumors: a preliminary report. Br. J. Urol. 1991; 67: 158-61.
17. Blomjous CEM, Schipper NW, Baak JPA. The Volume of mophometry and DNA flow cytometry in addition to classic prognosticators in superficial urinary bladder carcinoma. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 1989; 91: 243-8.
18. Abel PD, Henderson D, Bennett MK, Hall RR, Williams G. Differing interpretations by pathologists of the pT category and grade of transitional cell cancer of the bladder. Br. J. Urol. 1988; 62: 339-42.
19. Carbin BE, Ekman P, Gustafson H, Christensen NJ, Sandstedt B, Silfversward C. Grading of human urothelial carcinoma based on nuclear atypia and mitotic frequency: 1. histological description. J. Urol. 1991; 145: 968-71.
20. Ooms EC, Kurver PH, Veldhuizen RW, Alons CL, Boon ME. Morphometric grading of bladder tumors in comparison with histologic grading by pathologists. Hum. Pathol. 1983; 14: 144-50.
21. Robertson AJ, Beck JS, Burnett RA et al. Observer variability in histopathological reporting of transitional cell carcinoma and epithelial dysplasia in bladders. J. Clin. Pathol. 1990; 43: 17-21.
22. de Meester U, Young IT, Lindeman J, van der Linden HC. Towards a quantitative grading of bladder tumors. Cytometry 1991; 12: 602-13.
23. Parmar MK, Freedman LS, Hargreave TB, Tolley DA. Prognostic factors for recurrence and followup policies in the treatment of superficial bladder cancer: report from the British Medical Research Council Subgroup on Superficial Bladder Cancer (Urological Cancer Working Party). J. Urol. 1989; 142: 284-8.
24. Zhang YH, Kanamaru H, Oyama N et al. Comparison of nuclear morphometric results between needle biopsy and surgical specimens from patients with prostate cancer. Urology 1999; 54: 763-6.
25. Kanamaru H, Zhang YH, Takahashi M et al. Analysis of the mechanism of discrepant nuclear morphometric results comparing preoperative biopsy and prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2000; 56: 342-5.